If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
piano lessons (was appropriate age - music / ballet class)
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
Elizabeth Gardner writes:
The ones who get obsessed with practicing (as opposed to the ones who are kept to a strict practice schedule by obsessed parents) are in the minority, and often are the ones that are truly gifted at whatever the activity is. In these cases, obsession isn't something undesirable or avoidable--it's their destiny. I don't agree at all about "destiny". Take a world-class ballerina, and put her in a different environment where she never gets exposed to ballet, and she would become something totally different. She wouldn't necessarily discover ballet just because she's good at it, nor, even if she were exposed to ballet, would she necessarily develop the "obsession" necessary to develop her talents, if her environment and parenting led her in a different direction. If my daughter had the talent to be a world-class ballerina, I still wouldn't necessarily want her to, nor would I agree that it's her inevitable "destiny". Making decisions about what's good for children is what parents do. David desJardins |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
David desJardins wrote:
If my daughter had the talent to be a world-class ballerina, I still wouldn't necessarily want her to, nor would I agree that it's her inevitable "destiny". Making decisions about what's good for children is what parents do. Sure, agreed on the "destiny" bit. On the other hand, people answer questions relative to their experience. Not trying to speak for the OP, my experience is that it's rare to see kids encouraged to develop unique skills deeply. I see way too much of kids being sent to half a dozen "enrichment activities" from music lessons to two different team sports plus gymnastics and dance, and not being allowed to really commit to any of them because they have to keep up the schedule. These kids learn that it's too much of a pain to learn skills and be extraordinarily good at something, so they should probe around for natural talent and enjoy it as long as it lasts, and then move on. I happen to organize a competitive science activity, and I run across all sorts of kids who want to look into some activities for a few hours a week for a while, and then they either get lucky or just proclaim that they "aren't good at that kind of thing" and wander off. That bothers me a lot. Maybe I'm projecting a bit on this subthread, but I read Elizabeth Gardner's post with a lot of agreement and sympathy, despite my believing that it's possible for a parent to change things. The point is, if a kid wants to develop a skill and become really good at something, I see that as a positive development. Only when the kid decides that about several skills and threatens to end up overcommitted would I intervene. [Note: I realize this phenomenon is probably a bit less common in general society; I know mostly homeschooled kids because of my involvement in a group in town here, and that influences this a lot. Nevertheless, I think there are plentiful examples of this same thing happening in traditionally schooled families.] -- www.designacourse.com The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere. Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer MindIQ Corporation |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 01:37:45 -0400, Chris Smith wrote:
snip I see way too much of kids being sent to half a dozen "enrichment activities" from music lessons to two different team sports plus gymnastics and dance, and not being allowed to really commit to any of them because they have to keep up the schedule. These kids learn that it's too much of a pain to learn skills and be extraordinarily good at something, so they should probe around for natural talent and enjoy it as long as it lasts, and then move on. I happen to organize a competitive science activity, and I run across all sorts of kids who want to look into some activities for a few hours a week for a while, and then they either get lucky or just proclaim that they "aren't good at that kind of thing" and wander off. snip I have to disagree with you here. I was what most people would have considered an "overcommitted kid". At age 14, I was in school full time, worked a regular job on Fri., Sat., and Sun. nights, babysat weeknights and sunday afternoons, worked with two drug abuse prevention programs, wrote for my high school paper (occassional articles when I had time, not a column), was in chess club, tutored programming, volunteered at my old grade school working with special needs kids and helping maintain the computer system, was on both JV and Varsity forensics, and was active in local politics lobbying for more funds and support for education and drug abuse prevention. Somewhere in there, I even managed to have some semblance of a social life. I was always hopping, but I loved it. That year's activities were just a convenient example: I was equally swamped every year. Some people need to be busy to be happy, and I am one of those people. I developed many wonderful skills, and didn't ever feel pulled in too many directions. I did have the advantage that all of my activities played into one another. My drug abuse prevention programs, time at the gradeschool, and babysitting job all involved working with kids. The forensics team, political activities, journalism experience, drug abuse prevention programs, and teaching activities all helped my communications skills grow. Forensics, politics, and chess all required me to think on my feet and be quick to adapt. Nothing I did was in isolation from anything else I did. Unless your child is foundering while trying to juggle more than they can handle, seriously consider letting him/her decide what pace he/she works best at. Just my two cents Susan |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
x-no-archive:yes
Chris Smith wrote: David desJardins wrote: If my daughter had the talent to be a world-class ballerina, I still wouldn't necessarily want her to, nor would I agree that it's her inevitable "destiny". Making decisions about what's good for children is what parents do. Sometimes though kids do want to focus on some particular thing. I've seen this both in my own kids and in other people's kids. The question is really - does the kid have the talent to be world-class and if not how can we get them to accept this. DD#2 decided when she was 6 that she wanted to swim competitively. She bugged me for 2 years until I found a swim team that she could join, and it was a real pain to get to practice as it was a significant distance (half hour drive) from us and at a kind of difficult time. I got into coaching swimming because the pool was too far away from the house for me to do anything but stay at the pool - I'd have had to turn around and go back for her as soon as I got home if I returned home. Eventually she got all the other kids involved because it was far easier for me to have them all doing the same thing (practice was the same time for all age groups) especially after I started coaching. However none of my kids were world-class. They were useful team swimmers but were never more than B time. I did have one boy on my team who did more or less the same thing - he bugged his parents from the time he was 6. He didn't seem to me to be especially talented either, but his goal was to be on the Olympic team, and he in fact did that and swam in the consolation final in the Barcelona Olympics. He didn't medal, but I'd say that being in the top 20 in the world was world class. I also had swimmers on my teams who were extremely talented. They could win any race on our level even in their least favored strokes. But sometimes these kids wouldn't practice hard and wouldn't try hard because they could win without doing so. They might have been world class, but they didn't have the focus to do so. That's OK too. Sometimes they had another sport that they excelled in and were more interested in practicing and sometimes not. I also had kids who seemed to be talented but whose parents were pushing them quite a bit. Sometimes these people felt that my coaching wasn't good enough for their child. None of their children ever made a name for themselves or became world class that I know of. Sure, agreed on the "destiny" bit. On the other hand, people answer questions relative to their experience. Not trying to speak for the OP, my experience is that it's rare to see kids encouraged to develop unique skills deeply. I see way too much of kids being sent to half a dozen "enrichment activities" from music lessons to two different team sports plus gymnastics and dance, and not being allowed to really commit to any of them because they have to keep up the schedule. Why should they commit to something that they aren't really interested in? The whole point of doing varied activities is that you get different experiences and develop a certain amount of facility - if the kid isn't interested enough to want to go deeper, why blame the parent for over scheduling? IME it is far more common for the parent to push a kid that isn't that interested then it is for the kid to not be able to commit because of the parent. It just isn't that easy to MAKE a kid practice or go to something that they don't want to do. These kids learn that it's too much of a pain to learn skills and be extraordinarily good at something, so they should probe around for natural talent and enjoy it as long as it lasts, and then move on. I I don't see anything wrong with this idea. Why not enjoy a natural talent? There's no reason for a kid or anyone to suffer learning something that doesn't interest them no matter what talent they have. happen to organize a competitive science activity, and I run across all sorts of kids who want to look into some activities for a few hours a week for a while, and then they either get lucky or just proclaim that they "aren't good at that kind of thing" and wander off. I haven't been involved in 'competitive science' and don't really know what that is. That bothers me a lot. Maybe I'm projecting a bit on this subthread, but I read Elizabeth Gardner's post with a lot of agreement and sympathy, despite my believing that it's possible for a parent to change things. The point is, if a kid wants to develop a skill and become really good at something, I see that as a positive development. Only when the kid decides that about several skills and threatens to end up overcommitted would I intervene. [Note: I realize this phenomenon is probably a bit less common in general society; I know mostly homeschooled kids because of my involvement in a group in town here, and that influences this a lot. Nevertheless, I think there are plentiful examples of this same thing happening in traditionally schooled families.] grandma Rosalie |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
piano lessons (was appropriate age - music / ballet class)
In article ,
Karen G wrote: On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:38:47 EDT, (Robyn Kozierok) wrote: Matthew started piano at 6.25 years. He was in a group pre-piano class that involved a lot of playing by ear and solfege, as well as work on rhythm, etc. It was the first year of a two-year program. He was the oldest in the group and has progressed faster than the others, so at his teacher's advice, we are pulling him out of group lessons and going to private. He learned a lot. The class was advertised for 4.5 - 7yos but Matthew seemed to be at an optimal age for it. The younger kids (5 to 5.75yo when starting) really didn't seem to get nearly as much out of it. How much of the pre-piano is reading music at this age. I am considering starting my daughter next summer on the piano, but I may try to teach her myself. I would like to find and appropriate curriculum. Any suggestions? I believe Matthew's group was 6 kids. They had enough pianos/keyboards in the room for each kid to have their own. The curriculum was MusikGarten, which I believe is an offshoot of KinderMusik (some of their stuff is religiously oriented, I believe; this pre-piano course isn't). It was called something like "Music Makers at the Keyboard". The materials were fairly expensive and included a workbook and 2 CD's -- a listening CD and a practice CD. In theory, they spend about half the year playing by ear and then move into reading the music, but Matt's group really didn't get into the reading music much as most or the kids just weren't ready for that. Matt was the only one who learned to play with 2 hands, though the program includes that early on. The CDs are good. For the songs they will play, they first play/sing the song, then sing the solfege (Do-do-do sol-sol-sol do-do-do-sol, etc...) They learn how to play sol-mi-do in several different keys/positions at first, so they can play their songs in different keys. I found the approach really interesting and neat, and seemed to work really well for Matt. --Robyn |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
Chris Smith writes:
That bothers me a lot. Maybe I'm projecting a bit on this subthread, but I read Elizabeth Gardner's post with a lot of agreement and sympathy, despite my believing that it's possible for a parent to change things. The point is, if a kid wants to develop a skill and become really good at something, I see that as a positive development. Well, I think it depends a lot on what the skill is. Suppose the child wants to become really good at Quake III. OK, she can win computer game tournaments, but does that have so much value that you want to encourage that? That example is intentionally artificial to get people to see the point. But I tend to feel the same way about most sports. They have intrinsic value (from a fitness and health point of view) in moderation, but there's no particular value in overdoing them just to be "really good". Music and ballet (from the subject of this thread) are more nuanced. I can see value in doing those well (as a career, or in order to be able to perform for the entertainment of others), but much of the value that I see from them mostly would be gained from moderate involvement (e.g., I think music study can help one develop an appreciation of music, and also some logical and symbolic reasoning skills, and perhaps some finger dexterity and coordination; ballet, in moderation, can be a good way to develop fitness [although it may well damage one's health when done to excess], and may also help develop an appreciation for dance and music). I guess I'm far more interested in having my own children do several of these things in moderation, than to obsessively participate in one of them. (I can easily imagine 10+ hours/week of ballet practice and drill at age 8 or so, as a path to becoming a really serious ballerina, which I think is too much for that age from the point of view of overall development, as well as interfering with family life. While I'm not specifically familiar with ballet schools, I know that other physical activities, e.g., many sports, often require that level of commitment from children who want to become "really good".) David desJardins |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
In article , David desJardins says...
I guess I'm far more interested in having my own children do several of these things in moderation, than to obsessively participate in one of them. (I can easily imagine 10+ hours/week of ballet practice and drill at age 8 or so, as a path to becoming a really serious ballerina, which I think is too much for that age from the point of view of overall development, as well as interfering with family life. While I'm not specifically familiar with ballet schools, I know that other physical activities, e.g., many sports, often require that level of commitment from children who want to become "really good".) David desJardins How would you approach it if one of your children wanted to concentrate on one thing, and it were something like ballet? Banty |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
appropriate age - music / ballet class
David desJardins wrote:
I guess I'm far more interested in having my own children do several of these things in moderation, than to obsessively participate in one of them. We probably aren't in disagreement, of course, but rather focusing on different aspects of the same issue. If we wanted to meaningfully disagree, both of us would have to stop using judgement-relative terms like "moderation" and "obsession" and "casual" and start giving absolute measurements of committment that we consider appropriate or inappropriate. I can't very say that "moderation" is bad and "obsession" is good, because the words themselves imply the value judgements. The problem I see, in real life, is that a lot of kids (mostly from a particular homeschool support group I am involved with) DO claim to be interested in something specific, sign up for some cooperative classes on it for an hour a week for about eight or nine weeks, and then decide that it's not fun for them that way, because they are digging below the glamorous surface of something and getting into the part that requires effort. I imagine the same kind of thing happens when kids that are fascinated with ballerinas find out that some dance steps are difficult or that they don't look graceful and poised after practicing for a month, or when a kid that really likes the idea of figure skating discovers that they have a good bit of practice to go before they will bedoing jumps and twirls. Of course, I also see kids who are a bit intrigued and show up to see if it catches their fancy, and leave when they find that it doesn't. These kids don't worry me. What worries me is the kids who come and talk about how chemistry (for example, because that's the kind of activity I'm mostly involved in) is their passion and they have been fascinated with it for years, and then receive no encouragement to continue when they are asked to learn basic concepts of chemistry that they didn't know and start having to work at something. I worry about these kids because I *know* that they are even less into other things, that this *is* the kind of thing that is most likely to hold their interest, and nevertheless, they are being casually allowed, even encouraged, to back off from it because it got hard. So I'll admit that my frustration at watching this happen was building up and looking for a place to vent to, and this thread wasn't the perfect place. Nevertheless, it did vent here, and you got to see it. -- www.designacourse.com The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere. Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer MindIQ Corporation |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Requiring a child to stick to an activity was appropriate age - music / ballet class
In article , Rosalie B. wrote:
Particularly with music, where in order to get good enough to enjoy it, it has to be practiced for a long time. I feel about music in almost the same way I feel about regular school. All kids should do it to the point of being able to play a tune from a piece of easy music. I got this level of instruction, and then some, and I still can't remember or reproduce a tune with anything like normal levels of accuracy. It may be genetic, since my father can't carry a tune either and it looks like my son can't (perhaps a bit early to tell yet at 7, but he doesn't even like listening to music), but my mother and my siblings are quite musical (my sister even majored in music in college and was quiet a good French horn player). How much do you push music on someone with considerably less than average skill at it? Other than the readin' writin' and 'rithmetic and other things that they learn in school, I think all children should learn how to do various skills for safety and in order to live in their society. Things as varied as how to swim and how to drive a gearshift car. But after the child learns to swim, if they really don't like it, they don't have to be on a swim team for years. Swimming is definitely a life skill that all kids should be taught if possible. It's another one of those things that I got lots of instruction in, but never got any good at. I'm not so sure that driving a manual gearshift is an important skill any more. If it is, my son will be at a distinct disadvantage, since neither my wife not I have ever had a driver's license. I regard knowing how to read a bus schedule and ride a bus as life skills, and am continually amazed at how many college students and adults here in Santa Cruz have never acquired these skills. We've had some discussion on what the life skills are that a child should learn. I don't think ballet is one of them, although my mom thought it was good for teaching someone to move gracefully. Ballet is only one of many ways to learn to move gracefully, and hardly the most useful. Training in a martial art that uses flowing movements is another route to this goal. I think that learning how to fall safely is a really important life skill, so have my son in aikido classes, for the movement practice and the falling practice. (I sometimes do aikido myself, when my knees will let me.) My mom had certain skills that she thought a well brought up young lady should have. This included playing the piano or some musical instrument, ability to ride a horse, swim, play bridge, sail a boat, play tennis, and dance (that is ballroom dancing). Her idea was that if a boy asked me or my sister out on a sailing date (for instance) that we should know enough about it not to completely embarrass ourselves and our date. I don't think these are the same skills that I would say a girl (or child) needs now, although I think everyone should know how to swim. The basic concept, that activities one is likely to be called on to do socially are good to know about, is still a good one, but what those activities are will vary enormously from time to time and from place to place. Even more important are skills that will keep one alive and healthy (swimming, knowing how to fall safely, cooking, doing laundry, riding a bike safely, ...). -- Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels) Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed) Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics Affiliations for identification only. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Review: The Saddest Music in the World (**) | Steve Rhodes | General | 0 | May 28th 04 05:44 AM |
Music | musictopper53 | General | 0 | March 18th 04 12:46 AM |
Mr. Rogers Videos and Music | paul | General | 1 | March 1st 04 03:27 AM |
at what age - music and ballet class | Jean | General | 19 | August 4th 03 10:35 PM |