UEA Music Department to close

[teamsaint]

this stuff about AAb students is absolute rubbish, and lazy rubbish at that.

People develop at different rates. Some people have really bad teenage years with stuff going on that is out of their control.They should be encouraged not denied opportunities.

Unviversities should take people and develop their potential, not just look at a row of somewhat meaningless grades and make a snap decision.

This should be about education, not lazy weeding out.

[PhilipT]

People develop at different rates. Some people have really bad teenage years with stuff going on that is out of their control.They should be encouraged not denied opportunities.

I don't disagree, but doesn't it follow that such people shouldn't be admitted to university until they are ready for it? University isn't there to be a haven they can escape to. Perhaps such people need such a haven, and it should be available to them, but that isn't what university is for.

I grew up in a single-parent household (after an acrimonious divorce when I was seven or so), went to the local comprehensive, and got AAA and a place at Oxford, where I met people with far wealthier and happier and more privileged backgrounds. I'd've been a bit p*ssed off if any of them had suggested I had or should have got there on anything other than academic merit, and I expect they'd have felt the same if I'd made the same suggestion about them. And before you ask, yes there were mature students at my college, and financial assistance for those who needed it.

Higher education isn't cheap, and it isn't for everyone and certainly not for every teenager. Some will find vocational training more useful and more fulfilling. Denying that has led, in recent years, to too many not-very-bright people doing not-very-challenging courses at not-very-good universities, and the available money spread too thinly.

[MrGongGong]

Good for you Philip but this has little to do with the situation at UEA



I was just sent this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeOPbnyMNf8

[Simon]

Even if any of the doubts that you list above are true and accordingly justifiable (and you provide no evidence in support of any of them)

Sorry - I thought you'd have read the links given, from whence my comments largely came.

are they sufficient in and of themselves to warrant the demise of, rather than certain efficiency improvements in, the said department?

Well, they add up to a fair case. How much more do you want? The fact that measures for improvements were identified as necessary in 2002, and still haven't been implemented is, alone, a serious indictment.



I'm afraid that the idea that all these inefficent departments have a natural right to exist and that anybody wanting to close them for any reason must be opposed is a non-starter, however natural a reaction it might be to those affected. You want it - you pay for it.

[Simon]

this stuff about AAb students is absolute rubbish, and lazy rubbish at that.

People develop at different rates. Some people have really bad teenage years with stuff going on that is out of their control.They should be encouraged not denied opportunities.

Unviversities should take people and develop their potential, not just look at a row of somewhat meaningless grades and make a snap decision.

This should be about education, not lazy weeding out.

Just when you appear to be using your brain, teamsaint, you go and spoil it. Some of what you say is undoubtedly true, but then you draw irrational conclusions from it! You can't surely be suggesting that universities should take all and sundry onto all their courses with no evidence of intellectual ability or academioc achievement?

[MrGongGong]

You want it - you pay for it.

I guess this also applies to R3
public education
and
The NHS

[ahinton]

Sorry - I thought you'd have read the links given, from whence my comments largely came.

I had, for what they may or may not be worth; no need to apologise (not in this case, anyway).

Well, they add up to a fair case. How much more do you want? The fact that measures for improvements were identified as necessary in 2002, and still haven't been implemented is, alone, a serious indictment.

I'm afraid that the idea that all these inefficent departments have a natural right to exist and that anybody wanting to close them for any reason must be opposed is a non-starter, however natural a reaction it might be to those affected. You want it - you pay for it.

This may be the case, so you tell me of any organisation, public or private, that has never displayed any inefficiencies for whatever reason; do you accordingly conclude that any organisation that is not 100% efficient all the time (albeit according to whose specific standards I know not and you do not say, of course) should be either scrapped altogether or all public funding withdrawn from it?

I also cited the case of Arts Council funding cuts to all major British orchestras; would you really seek to convince us that every one of those orchestras was guilty of precisely 11% inefficiencies of any and all kinds and so that very percentage of funding assistance should justifiably be withdrawn therefrom?

No, sorry Simon, it just doesn't add up. It is perfectly obvious that very few music oriented organisations, be they ensembles, opera houses and companies, orchestras, concert venues, individual artists, music libraries, music education establishments and facilities of each and every kind from primary school level to post-graduate level, can possibly ever hope to be fully self-funding at all times or able to function 100% without any kind of national or local government funding assistance, however "efficient" any of them might be by anyone's standards of efficiency, so what would you advocate? - scrapping the lot unless they can all find sufficient private and other sponsorship at all times in order to ensure their survival?

There are times when I - and no doubt others also - wonder why you're here on a board dedicated principally to matters musical. Your "you want it, you pay for it" remark is presumably by definition and of necessity directed solely and specifically at those who might actually be in a position to afford to do so; I suppose that the rest who cannot do so simply don't matter to you. Well, at least you've made your position clear.

[MrGongGong]

indeed ahinton

NONE of the musical life of the country that folk here profess to love so much (maybe with the exception of the choirs on CE ?) would exist without funding, this includes Gubbays gigs at the RAH and Glyndebourne etc

You have to decide whether you think its worth having these things or not .........and I guess some are happy to live without

[teamsaint]

Just when you appear to be using your brain, teamsaint, you go and spoil it. Some of what you say is undoubtedly true, but then you draw irrational conclusions from it! You can't surely be suggesting that universities should take all and sundry onto all their courses with no evidence of intellectual ability or academioc achievement?

the very strong implication in what I was saying, and I am sorry if it wasn't clear, is that admissions procedures mostly serve to select those who have achieved well, mostly through having been to"good "schools.
Real, fair selection procedures would include blind tests, interviews, aptitude testing as well as looking at accomplishments.Lack of funding won't often allow for this, but then most "top" university departments are happy to accept well groomed private school kids....even though they don't always perform at degree level.

Phillip T suggests quite rightly that people should be admitted when they are "ready for it"... a very tough thing to judge.
I absolutely accept that a good number of people get their places on merit.....but a lot get them because of background and NOT intrinsic ability. (50% of Westminster pupils get into Oxbridge, and noone will ever convince me that this is anything to do with real academic ability).
I am certainly not suggesting university should be a haven....far from it, I think it should be a place where people are encouraged, rigorously, to develop, and where real potential can be unlocked.

[PhilipT]

I absolutely accept that a good number of people get their places on merit.....but a lot get them because of background and NOT intrinsic ability. (50% of Westminster pupils get into Oxbridge, and noone will ever convince me that this is anything to do with real academic ability).

I once visited Westminster School (have you?), and was given a personal guided tour of parts of the school by the librarian. During the tour he was approached with a polite question, about a book, by a boy in full uniform. The time was close to 9:00pm. I was impressed by the facilities, but also by the sheer hard work of the pupils. The librarian made no bones about the fact that getting pupils into the 'right' universities was a major aim, but bear in mind that Westminster has good material to work with. Those who pay for the ability to choose their child's school (and I include those who buy houses in the right catchment areas) know their children, and research the schools. If you have a free spirit, you think about Bedales; if you have a child who's strong academically, you think about Westminster, and so on.

[teamsaint]

I once visited Westminster School (have you?), and was given a personal guided tour of parts of the school by the librarian. During the tour he was approached with a polite question, about a book, by a boy in full uniform. The time was close to 9:00pm. I was impressed by the facilities, but also by the sheer hard work of the pupils. The librarian made no bones about the fact that getting pupils into the 'right' universities was a major aim, but bear in mind that Westminster has good material to work with. Those who pay for the ability to choose their child's school (and I include those who buy houses in the right catchment areas) know their children, and research the schools. If you have a free spirit, you think about Bedales; if you have a child who's strong academically, you think about Westminster, and so on.

I have been to any number of top public schools. I went to a good one. I know that they can be very efficient at producing good grades. Rich people don't pay £25k pA for fun.
I also know how contacts and networks work.And I know that university admissions procedures can be very lazy.

And yes, I have visited Westminster, also Eton, (worst table manners I have ever seen,)Charterhouse, and Winchester amongst others.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/aug/05/poor-students-bursary-oxb

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/06/oxford-colleges-no-black-students

Happy to carry on this chat, but I think we should probably get off this thread to do it !!

[Suffolkcoastal]

I was a particularly late developer musically, my A Levels were very poor. Although I started to study music when I was 20, I still struggled through lack of confidence and support when I was younger and inspite of achieving a real spurt between 20-22, I so lacked confidence in my abilities (as I discovered later even at that time this wasn't justified) that I gave up. I now have a deep classical music knowledge and am becoming more convinced in my own compositional abilities with each passing day as I've never formally been taught composition but can seem to compose naturally as a 2nd nature. Of course it is all too late now. As my A Levels were poor and I'm now in my later 40's no-one is realistcally going to be interested. So late-developers are at a disadvantage, which is why Universities need to be more accommodating to part-timers which would give people in my position another chance. As I've also mentioned there is still an unpleasant educational snobbery in this country as on more than one occasion when I've had a little bit of confidence in my abilities, I've been quickly put down, as I can't possibly do what I say I can do as I haven't been to the 'right places' etc.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

evidence and the case made to close

reading a bit between the lines the UEA never really meant it for the last ten years or so .... they should have closed it in 2002 or done it better with more resources ...

[teamsaint]

I was a particularly late developer musically, my A Levels were very poor. Although I started to study music when I was 20, I still struggled through lack of confidence and support when I was younger and inspite of achieving a real spurt between 20-22, I so lacked confidence in my abilities (as I discovered later even at that time this wasn't justified) that I gave up. I now have a deep classical music knowledge and am becoming more convinced in my own compositional abilities with each passing day as I've never formally been taught composition but can seem to compose naturally as a 2nd nature. Of course it is all too late now. As my A Levels were poor and I'm now in my later 40's no-one is realistcally going to be interested. So late-developers are at a disadvantage, which is why Universities need to be more accommodating to part-timers which would give people in my position another chance. As I've also mentioned there is still an unpleasant educational snobbery in this country as on more than one occasion when I've had a little bit of confidence in my abilities, I've been quickly put down, as I can't possibly do what I say I can do as I haven't been to the 'right places' etc.

All very true, in terms of development.
There really is so much wasted and under developed talent.

Not classical I know, but this

http://www.gretchenpeters.com/tour.php

highly rated lady has much to say on the subject of later development.
And she has done alright, (and is very talented, having seen her play).

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Suffolkcoastal #42:

Of course it is all too late now.

I beg to differ, Suffy. At the very least, your enthusiasm for composers I had neglected has encouraged me to listen again with fresh interest and renewed pleasure, and I suspect that your pricking the consciences of the BBC on the old MBs had a significant part in the appearance of Schuman as "Composer of the Week" earlier this year. (If they'd thought of it themselves, it would surely have occured in his Centenary year.) And WHO has "put you down"? Barenboim? Anne-Sophie Mutter? Birtwistle? ... or some disillusioned non-entity with their own hang-ups, frustrations and lack of self-fulfilment clouding their opinions?

Your own compositional development is (has to be, alas) its own reward. Most composers I know are looking to the example of Janacek to support their self-confidence (a "brealthrough" at sixty!): "non-trained" Painters, Poets, Writers have easier means to present their work than Composers who (unless they work with and have access to Electronic media, or can play their own work) need the intermediary-ship (I can be creative with vocabulary, can't I?) of other Musicians. Plough on with your work to the best of your abilities and to your own criteria of satisfaction: that, not the publishing contract or the regular performances, is what matters most. To you, your work and the way you "feel" i n the world.

So late-developers are at a disadvantage, which is why Universities need to be more accommodating to part-timers which would give people in my position another chance.

Very Best Wishes.