Strike

[Martin]

It just doesn't work that way Martin. If they are not at the specialist school from the word go they loose critical time in that speciality, as you well know.

Not true.  Children start to learn musical instruments at different times and reach various standards at different times.  Very often a school will have a peripatetic teacher, for instruction in a particular instrument, whose skills will suffice to  a certain level.  At some stage, dependent on the skills of that teacher, the peripatetic teacher may say that a pupil has attained such a high standard that they have reached the limit of what that teacher can teach them, and this can happen at various ages. So it's at that point that the pupil and her parents, taking advice from the school, might consider transfer to a specialist school where a more intense programme under the instruction of a more highly qualified teacher can be embarked upon.

Furthermore it is far harder to change schools half way through, as the different schools will use different examining boards with different syllabi - the exception to this clearly being at the start of 2-year exam courses.
Frankly though, we are not going to agree about the best way forward so I do not propose to continue with this argument!

Indeed, there are better and worse times to move schools and any move needs to be considered carefully by the parent and the pupil taking advice from the schools. But, as you can see, this is not the same as selecting pupils at the age of 11.   It's not rocket science. Perhaps you need to think about it a bit more, but nothing I have suggested is particularly unachievable or unworkable.

[AndyHB]

It just doesn't work that way Martin. If they are not at the specialist school from the word go they loose critical time in that speciality, as you well know.

Not true.  Children start to learn musical instruments at different times and reach various standards at different times.  Very often a school will have a peripatetic teacher, for instruction in a particular instrument, whose skills will suffice to  a certain level.  At some stage, dependent on the skills of that teacher, the peripatetic teacher may say that a pupil has attained such a high standard that they have reached the limit of what that teacher can teach them, and this can happen at various ages. So it's at that point that the pupil and her parents, taking advice from the school, might consider transfer to a specialist school where a more intense programme under the instruction of a more highly qualified teacher can be embarked upon.

So, are you suggesting that a pupil who shows remarkable talent in playing the flute, say, at the age of 14 is necessarily going to develop to the same level of a child who was at that level at, say, 8?  The child found to be a prodigy at 14 will have lots of other things to think about in their life - GCSE's in general, friends, sex and sexuality, ... 

They're not starting from the same starting point.

Like Andrew, I believe that you are proposing a Utopian idea that is largely unworkable in real life without a completely different approach to the importance of exams and qualifications in society.  Only then, when exams become largely obsolete, and professional qualifications are only achieved 'in post', would any of your ideas even have a hint of a chance of succeeding.

[Martin]

So, are you suggesting that a pupil who shows remarkable talent in playing the flute, say, at the age of 14 is necessarily going to develop to the same level of a child who was at that level at, say, 8?

I have been very clear - but, yet again you deliberately ignore half of what I'm saying because you don't want to accept that you haven't raised any real problems with this sort of approach. 

What I'm suggesting is that the stage that a child needs the sort of specialist tuition we are talking about, varies depending upon a number of factors - when they started playing, the age at which their exceptional talent develops or is recognised, whether specialist teaching to some level is available to them without attending a specialist school and, of course, what sort of education the parents and the pupil think is best, and at what stage. As I say, it's not rocket science, and nothing I'm suggesting is unachievable or unworkable.  Importantly, it can be available to all who show talent, to rich people, to not so rich people, and to poor people.  Neither you nor Andrew has actually raised any real obstacle to this and you in particular, Andy, are beginning to look silly by pretending that I haven't said half of what I have said.

I agree that, with the current state of the country and world, that we are so far away from this that it can seem like something that can't be achieved, but that's not because there's any real practical problem with it working, it's because the rich don't give up their privilege lightly and there is a massive propaganda machine telling people that change for the better is impossible.  We should not abandon the dream of a better world just because it seems a long haul to get there.