"At a time when governments and the general public seek evidence of rising standards in education, there is a widely held view that formal assessment in musical performance will hinder and distort progression.
In this presentation I aim to promote the case that criterion-based referencing offers a framework for objective judgements in respect of students' instrumental performances and that these can be applied at every stage in their musical and technical development to provide an incentive for both teacher and student to monitor and record progression in a systematic form."
NB: The paper will be prefaced by a "few well chosen words", and a fairly lighthearted reference to certain differences in English/American terminology, e.g. an explanation of the use of the term "Grade" to avoid confusion with the "1st Grade", "2nd Grade" etc of the American school system.
Although I do not know who first coined the phrase, "the pursuit of excellence", in educational circles today it is one we cannot escape - it draws us together in a common endeavour. But, what is excellence? We are all pursuing it (so it seems), but can we define it?
One dictionary I referred to described excellence as the state of excelling; surpassing merit or quality. That would suggest that excellence is comparative rather than absolute, that the pursuit of excellence is open- ended. We might go further and say there is no such qualitative state as excellence and the pursuit of excellence is the undertaking of a journey without an ending; that excellence, per se, is unobtainable. Clearly such a theory is flawed, but the frequency of its use as a measure of merit or quality has devalued its worth and leaves open the question, on which set of criteria we adjudge a state of excellence.
It may be that the pursuit of excellence is a journey that should have no ending. But such an ideal has its dangers, as many teachers will testify. Witness the frustration and psychological upheaval in the child who seeks perfection but never has the satisfaction of knowingly achieving it.
Whether or not it is the pursuit of excellence which inspires or drives us and our pupils, it is my long held view that realistic targets need to be set and results assessed at regular intervals, and that for these to be meaningful, they need to be measured against predetermined statements or models of expectations.
Unfortunately, the mere mention of assessment seems to raise the temperature of some well-meaning educationists.
In my work, first as a government adviser in music education and later as Chief Executive of the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music, I have found myself defending all too frequently the role of examinations, which assessment implies; but it is the incorrect use and not the existence of examinations as such that needs to be attacked. The setting of sensible targets, well-graded and purposeful is essential. Assessment should assist musical development, but will only do so if rooted in educationally sound principles. Failure to design, institute, and use wisely, appropriate procedures, will perpetuate the criticism that formal assessment in music (in particular the assessment of musical performance) acts as a constraint to teaching initiatives.
At this point I would like to quote two very different writers on the matter of testing.
First, Lawrence Stenhouse, in his "Introduction to curriculum research and development", where he suggests that the teacher ought to be a critic, not a marker.
I quote:
We must accept that a students' personal judgement of his work is, or can be, just as valid as his teacher's provided it is made honestly and that he has exercised discrimination. But that involves training in the art of discrimination and that in performance is an aural skill. Aural skills have to be taught. The teacher may consider the student's opinion naive or inappropriate, but in such a case the strategy would not be to stifle the response but to plan further experiences which might induce a change of mind allowing of course for the possibility that this might be on the teacher's part rather than the pupil's.
The second is from Errki Pohjola's book, "Tapiola Sound", I quote:
Those of us who have heard the Tapiola Choir (and perhaps recall their presence here in Tampa during the ISME conference last year) will recognize the pursuit of excellence which is the hallmark of Pohjola's work with the choir and will readily acknowledge the remarkably high quality of musicianship he achieves with his young musicians. However, the training of the professional musician is not unlike the training for any other profession. There will be the same need for regular checks of competence and that, in my view, means adequate testing at key stages in the young student's career path including entrance audition to music colleges and universities.
Competence embraces technical efficiency and it does our profession quite a deal of harm if governments and the public at large, who rightly seek accountability for the investment they make in education, perceive us as being woolly in this respect. We ignore this fact at our peril.
The solving of technical problems provides the means whereby we reach given objectives. No musical development is possible without the acquisition of appropriate enabling skills. Assessment gives the opportunity to monitor and record that development - it is not an end in itself, but Society prefers to see the information gained from this monitoring as incontrovertible factual evidence and the education system has habitually sought to provide it in that form.
Unfortunately the situation presents a fundamental incongruity for much that is important to know about a pupil's achievements and development cannot be conceived as incontestable fact. Some would say that it should not be assumed that assessment of either process or product must necessarily be made by means of examination and that these are the currently preferred means of assessment, not because of their suitability, but because they are superior to other methods in terms of public credibility adding that a thriving curriculum will depend on that perception changing.
Currently, the dice is loaded against such idealists, and certainly the loosening of the bonds of formal assessment should not be contemplated until the education system can provide (with greater clarity than is the case at present) what their objectives and methods of assessment would be which are valid, appropriate and responsible.
It is significant that after much heartache, exacerbated by politicised opposition, we have in the UK established a National Curriculum for all pupils in mainstream education in all core subjects (of which music is one) with attainment targets at three key-stages (ages 7, 11 and 14). Standardised tests are set in English, Math(s) and Science and the results are published to allow parents and teachers to measure pupils' achievements against national norms. These are in addition to the Certificate of Secondary Education taken at age 16 and the advanced level at age 18 which have long been a feature of English schools and are now the subject of league tables. In this way schools can be assessed on their performance and the results placed in the public domain. (I will refer to this matter again at the end of my paper.) In this new emphasis on assessment I do not doubt there are dangers for music education, but that should not prevent what is measurable being measured and used as a guide to both achievement and potential.
Whilst achievement is clearly assessable, is potential? For the purpose of recording a student's progression there is possibly not the need. The statement often seen in school reports - "he has great potential" begs many questions, but experience in auditioning for places in specialist schools of music, where one is looking for potential rather than achievement, has shown that whilst the outstandingly gifted child is immediately recognisable and unmistakable, there are common features amongst these children which signal them out as potential performers:
We all know that the outstandingly gifted child is very rare, but well devised tests based on these features will help to identify those who could excel with good teaching and regular assessment to help them realise their potential. The pursuit of excellence should not be confined to those who are outstandingly gifted. There is clearly an obligation on us as music educators to put down markers, to give teachers and pupils goals which are suitable for the large number of children who derive pleasure and educational benefit from playing an instrument and not just for the more gifted. (One of the assessment exercises which we will do later in this presentation will illustrate this point.)
The question therefore is not whether to assess, but what form should this assessment take to ensure progression.
There are, of course, ways to motivate pupils other than by assessment through formal examination, though motivation in itself is not sufficient if it leads nowhere. Targets are an essential constituent of motivation....the journey to somewhere. The targets and the journey need to be progressive.
Many teachers rely on the pupils' concert which can be educationally fruitful. The sense of occasion is an important part of performance. There is a challenge to respond to and pupils can revel in the adulation they receive for their hard work. We all know it can just as easily be an unforgettable bad experience.
Professional judgement must be used in choosing the right occasion, the right place and the right piece for this performance to avoid traumas. But let us face reality, in a pupils' concert performances are applauded by the audience; they are not evaluated. The performance might impress by its vitality; the listener may simply find it satisfying without feeling impelled to identify any of its qualities or characteristics. They might like it, dislike it or just be indifferent. As a result, the performer will be aware of the audience's reaction, but not necessarily of their assessment.
Competitive and non-competitive festivals will give further opportunities for performance. These will provide an evaluation of a performance by an adjudicator who will bring to bear to the occasion his or her professional judgements, but the hiring of local musicians to evaluate without a clear set of criteria and training, as seems to be the case here in America, leaves a dependence on personal opinion which will have no credibility outside the area where those musicians are known, however distinguished they may be. Yes, they may be expressions of experienced opinion, but as such they are valued judgements which can be challenged. In a competitive situation they will also be comparative assessments, the value of the assessment depending on the quality of what one might call the opposition. The base line for the assessment will be variable as there will be no set criteria and often a choice of repertoire which defies comparison.
This might best be illustrated by introducing here an exercise in assessment in which three extracts of performances are to be ranked 1st, 2nd and 3rd. The performers are all pupils of the Yehudi Menuhin School. The recording was made by the BBC at a public concert. The ages of the performers range from 13 to 16 years.
(a) Three performances to rank 1st, 2nd & 3rd.
Three pieces of different musical styles, presenting different technical challenges.
Performance A:
Performance B:
Performance C:
1st________2nd________3rd________
(b) Which three of the following factors most influenced your decision making? (Tick as appropriate)
(c) Which of the following handicapped your judgement?
Fascinating though it is to make comparisons, by your answers to the questions in sections (b) and (c) you will recognize the problems which beset this approach to assessment of performance for the purpose of monitoring a pupil's progress. This would suggest that if there is to be objectivity in our assessment we will need to identify criteria upon which judgements can be based.
At this point I would like to digress somewhat to say a few words about the graded music examination system which first appeared in England in their present form in 1879. The reason for their introduction is interesting, and relevant.
In the first half of the nineteenth century the Industrial Revolution brought about enormous changes, but, inevitably, mass production had its downside. Time was money in the making of goods on a large scale and employers saw the advantage of seeking young people holding certificates. As a consequence, quasi educational institutions mushroomed offering certificates of competence in a multiplicity of skills. As England prospered in the wake of the social upheaval so public interest in music became commonplace, but, to use Neville Osborne's words, (Article, "The making of the grades", International Journal for Music Education, November 1983), "it was enjoyed with a delight only exceeded by the mediocrity of the material".
At the height of the bogus examination racket, as Osborne calls it, the national conservatoires realised it was for them not merely to protest about the poor quality of these examinations, the mediocrity of the material used, the low standards accepted and the spurious methods of assessment adopted, but to bring their influence to bear on the trade in paper certificates by setting up their own local music examinations. It coincided, too, with the pressures upon schools to be publicly accountable. A parliamentary bill in 1879 which called for the registration of teachers, stipulated that teachers in schools be qualified, including teachers of special subjects, such as "drawing, music, or the like".
Thus was born the graded music examinations which were first looked upon as a very British institution: maybe still are! The Associated Board, which was founded in 1889 and whose examinations were soon in demand throughout what was then known as the British Empire, now examines in over 80 countries worldwide and has in the past ten years been developing its work in the United States. For over one hundred years the Associated Board has thus had a strong and invigorating effect on music education. Their undoubted integrity has provided a yardstick for countless would-be performers, both the amateur and the professional student.
But, to return to the process of assessment, objectivity, to the degree that objectivity is possible, will flow from the identification of criteria against which objective judgements can be made. The danger, as we will see in the following exercise, is that analytical marking, as used by some examining bodies, is a mechanistic approach, the application of which, depending on the relative values given to the marking headings, can distort the overall result.
Marking a performance using headings where the mark in brackets would signify a passable level. (Copy of music attached)
Mark awarded Accuracy 20(12) ________ Choice of tempi including appropriate variation 15 (9) ________ Rhythmic continuity 15 (9) ________ Phrasing/articulation 15 (9) ________ Use of dynamics 10 (6) ________ Stylistic integrity 10 (6) ________ Quality of touch 10 (6) ________ Discretion in use of pedal 5 (3) ________ Total 100(60) ________
Consider whether the total corresponds to your overall assessment of the performance as a performance?
Activities concerned with preparing pupils for external examinations, which implies independent assessment, will have very clear intentions, that is, to prepare the student to pass the examination by covering the syllabus and allow for a margin of error, nervous tension and the unexpected. Although the criteria need to be known and recognized, they may not be of equal importance nor apply in every piece. The application of the criteria will in the end be a matter of aesthetic judgement. As we have seen in this last exercise, it is very easy to fall into the trap of making a marking list where most, if not all the headings refer to technical matters purely because objectivity can be more easily established in the technical field. As a result, assessment by analysis seems to take little account of the aesthetic nature of the performance.
Even though pupils may spend a substantial amount of time on the technique of performances they will not develop fully unless their technical studies involve considering both the music they are communicating and a possible audience to which the music might be communicated. The success or otherwise of this communication should apply at every stage of the learning process and therefore should be reflected in the assessment.
Because aesthetic judgements are based on what is felt or sensed, rather than calculated by an analysis and assessment of separate technical components, they are no less valid, but it will mean that a performance will have to be listened to and assessed against criteria which will be more all-embracing and contain elements which are based on experience and training of the assessors.
The training of examiners is an aspect that the Royal Schools of Music have taken very seriously and by regular moderation have achieved a remarkable degree of consistency over the years, a factor that has undoubtedly contributed to the high reputation of its examinations.
The Associated Board, as the external examining board of the Royal Schools of Music, reflects in its syllabus requirements the need for comprehensive musical training. At each level or "grade" the performance syllabuses have certain common elements: technical studies (including scales and arpeggios), sight-reading and aural tests, all of which can be assessed objectively and together represent 40% of the total marks available.
Before the higher grades in performance can be taken, there is a compulsory theory or practical musicianship examination. The level required is a minimum grade 5 of a parallel series, grades 1 to 8, followed by an advanced certificate in performance and a teachers' or performers' professional diploma.
Although the majority of the half million or so candidates each year will be in the 8 to 18 years of age category, with a distinction at grade 8 broadly equivalent to the expectations for college of music or university entrance in the UK, age is not taken into account when the assessment is made.
In the performance examinations in grades 1 to 8, and in addition to the tests referred to earlier, each candidate is required to play three prepared pieces from lists which have been carefully graded in respect of both technical and musical demands. The assessment starts from what might be called a tripod of criteria common to all instruments and all candidates. In broad terms the three legs of the tripod are:
In the following exercises in assessment using criterion referencing, the criteria will be based on the tripod model - technical accomplishment, musical understanding and communication.
NB: criteria based on expectations for a primary to intermediate level instrumentalist.
Steps:
Summary key to grades:
A = a performance of distinction with little reservation
B = a performance of merit, but with some reservation
C = a competent performance, but with significant reservation
D = an unsatisfactory performance (a standard below that required to pass)
Plus or minus may be added to grades A, B and C.
Result ________
Test for match with your original appraisal.
(noting more demanding criteria for more advanced instrumentalist).
Steps as in Assessment Exercise 3
Result ________
Test for match with your original appraisal.
At the beginning of this presentation I hinted that the "Pursuit of Excellence" might be a myth. Excellence was something we seemed to be pursuing without knowing its true meaning. The Sunday Times (arguably the most influential of Britain's national papers) conveniently supplied my closing words in a recent editorial under the general title, "Parent Power". Topped by the Royal Coat of Arms was the headline - "The pursuit of excellence". I immediately highlighted three sentences:
My contention is that the same can and must apply to standards in music performance and that regular assessment is a vital tool for progression, but that the system of assessment must have professional standing, the integrity of independence, be sound in educational principles and objective. None other deserves public recognition.