The importance of a distinction Options

[anacrusis]

*is heartily glad you don't have to pass all components of graded exams, and thinks it's probably better than this is so*

....largely because this is a restrictive way of assessing musical ability. There are many more hoops one could add to the basic mix in order fully to assess musicianship, which would be just as valid as the ones the various boards choose to give candidates to jump through - if you were to add them in as mandatory, and demand passes for each, you'd soon see a dropping off in pass rate, for the simple reason that we all have different strengths and weaknesses. Question is how we get round these, and I think the word "round" is significant here: heads down and through isn't always the best way to a given goal.

I can't see what the objection is to pass/merit/distinction - I have far more issues with the somewhat daft idea that only one of the three is worth having.

[VH2]

*is heartily glad you don't have to pass all components of graded exams, and thinks it's probably better than this is so*

It would be better to make the exams more specific. So a performance exam would be just that and aural tests would be quite separate (and a great deal less trivial). Incidentally the aural tests don't even test the aural skills that are of most use to a pianist like, for example, hearing the balance of tones in a chord or slight differences in dynamics, or the difference between a clean legato and a smudged one.

....largely because this is a restrictive way of assessing musical ability. There are many more hoops one could add to the basic mix in order fully to assess musicianship, which would be just as valid as the ones the various boards choose to give candidates to jump through - if you were to add them in as mandatory, and demand passes for each, you'd soon see a dropping off in pass rate, for the simple reason that we all have different strengths and weaknesses.

I completely agree, and I don't think the aural tests have any place in a test of competence in performing on an instrument. All that should matter is how well you play, irrespective of the skill set you used to achieve your level of performance. Probably sight-reading and performance should be separated too. You can be a brilliant performer, yet be quite a slow sight reader. Some of the best pianists cannot even read music. (Errol Garner, Art Tatum and George Shearing, were all magnificent pianists, yet Garner never learned to read music and Tatum and Shearing were both blind!!)

Question is how we get round these, and I think the word "round" is significant here: heads down and through isn't always the best way to a given goal.

We just continue to teach both specific instrumental skills AND all round musicianship to the best of our ability, use the flawed system of Grade exams as we think appropriate, and keep telling parents and teachers of other subjects the limitations of what the exams assess and how they assess it. And continue to rail against the misuse of the system by college admissions departments and others.

I can't see what the objection is to pass/merit/distinction - I have far more issues with the somewhat daft idea that only one of the three is worth having.

But I think they are two sides of the same issue. If we did not have pass/merit/distinction then we would not have the present situation where the superb achievement of passing Grade 8 is looked down on by many who think that only a Distinction is worth having (and do not understand that passing grade 8 piano is a far more difficult achievement than, for example, getting an A grade in an A level).

[anacrusis]

Look though at what is happening to all the universities trying to select their students at the moment: the political correctness of not letting kids feel bad about any given level of achievement has led to the system ironing out much of the sense of graded levels in exams - so many are getting top grades now, that working out who is actually suited to a course has become more difficult. The same would happen if there were simply a single hurdle of pass/fail at each exam level - and you'd have establishments trying to work out who actually was the scraped fail and who the comfortable one. Okay, so the way that the exams are set up now don't necessarily tell them all they need to know: I for one think that auditioning would have to be a part of selection of career musicians too, not simply a mark sheet from a music exam.

Having said that - I know fine well that had the university I eventually went to actually interviewed me as a raw eighteen year old, they'd have turned me down, as did the one which did interview me. And, had my university turned me down, then they'd also have lost someone who was actually pretty capable, and makes a competent and compassionate doctor, so no system of selection, in whatever career is perfect.

[Arundodonuts]

It's all very well saying that a grade 8 distinction it doesn't matter

I have never thought that it does not matter. I think it is a shame that it does matter, and that the exam boards have developed a system of three levels of pass in the Grade exams.

If there was only pass or fail, what do you think should be the pass mark? What about other exams with a range of pass grades - GCSEs, A levels, degrees?

If it were pass/fail there'd be no need for a mark.

I'm taking about the minimum score required to get a pass. Would you still use 100/150?

You would also be required to pass all components to get an overall pass

I completely agree, and I don't think the aural tests have any place in a test of competence in performing on an instrument. All that should matter is how well you play, irrespective of the skill set you used to achieve your level of performance. Probably sight-reading and performance should be separated too.

So having said you should have to get a pass in each section, you would actually only have one section, performing?

[notmusimum]

You would receive a written report on the performance, which would show you where you needed to improve, and a PASS or FAIL categorization for each component of the exam. You would also be required to pass all components to get an overall pass (as is now the case with the Diploma exams, but not in the Grade exams, where well played pieces can compensate for inferior oral skills and dodgy scales (or vice versa).

I think this is making everyone the same and there is enough of that around already. People who are genuinely good should be identified as such what does it matter if some people get higher marks than others. Distinction is something to aim for even if it's not always achieved.

[Seer_Green]

Distinction is something to aim for even if it's not always achieved.

I suppose, maybe as a teacher, I look at this slightly differently. My view is that what's most important is that each pupil should be allowed to realise their potential. Some pupils, for many reasons, will not get a distinction. That's not to say that they're not going to do their best, but for many, particularly adults, an average pass (which is still 78%) is a fantastic achievement. My concern about this striving for distinctions is that it potentially devalues the results of those who don't make it. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for rewarding everyone, and distinctions and merits are fantastic results, but for many pupils, so are passes and I think it's sometimes easy to shuffle those aside. That's not a criticism of anything anyone's said here, but I do feel it's important that we celebrate all achievement.

[willobie]

Distinction is something to aim for even if it's not always achieved.

I suppose, maybe as a teacher, I look at this slightly differently. My view is that what's most important is that each pupil should be allowed to realise their potential. Some pupils, for many reasons, will not get a distinction. That's not to say that they're not going to do their best, but for many, particularly adults, an average pass (which is still 78%) is a fantastic achievement. My concern about this striving for distinctions is that it potentially devalues the results of those who don't make it. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for rewarding everyone, and distinctions and merits are fantastic results, but for many pupils, so are passes and I think it's sometimes easy to shuffle those aside. That's not a criticism of anything anyone's said here, but I do feel it's important that we celebrate all achievement.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

W (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[FullofWind]

Distinction is something to aim for even if it's not always achieved.

I suppose, maybe as a teacher, I look at this slightly differently. My view is that what's most important is that each pupil should be allowed to realise their potential. Some pupils, for many reasons, will not get a distinction. That's not to say that they're not going to do their best, but for many, particularly adults, an average pass (which is still 78%) is a fantastic achievement. My concern about this striving for distinctions is that it potentially devalues the results of those who don't make it. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for rewarding everyone, and distinctions and merits are fantastic results, but for many pupils, so are passes and I think it's sometimes easy to shuffle those aside. That's not a criticism of anything anyone's said here, but I do feel it's important that we celebrate all achievement.

I agree, but it is teachers (of sorts) that are insisting on distinction level when students are applying for courses, orchestras etc.

[andante]

It's like saying that children shouldn't try to get A*s on their GCSEs if they are bright, because others can only achieve a C. If you want to apply to Oxbridge or top Universities it matters, otherwise all you need is 5 GCSEs.

For those who are candidates for NYO NCO and Conservatoires the distinction does matter, and just because a teacher doesn't attract that sort of pupil then you cannot just deny that it is a valid concern for those who do aspire to those things.

[Chris H]

But - just to make it clear - you do not need to have a distinction on paper to get into national ensembles or conservatoires. In that way the graded exams are not the same as A levels. Conservatoires and national ensembles all audition and it is the audition that ultimately counts, NOT the piece of paper. You can get into music college without having taken a single grade exam.

[Seer_Green]

For those who are candidates for NYO NCO and Conservatoires the distinction does matter, and just because a teacher doesn't attract that sort of pupil then you cannot just deny that it is a valid concern for those who do aspire to those things.

Well, I haven't said they don't matter (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

[Cyrilla]

Distinction is something to aim for even if it's not always achieved.

I suppose, maybe as a teacher, I look at this slightly differently. My view is that what's most important is that each pupil should be allowed to realise their potential. Some pupils, for many reasons, will not get a distinction. That's not to say that they're not going to do their best, but for many, particularly adults, an average pass (which is still 78%) is a fantastic achievement. My concern about this striving for distinctions is that it potentially devalues the results of those who don't make it. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for rewarding everyone, and distinctions and merits are fantastic results, but for many pupils, so are passes and I think it's sometimes easy to shuffle those aside. That's not a criticism of anything anyone's said here, but I do feel it's important that we celebrate all achievement.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

I was one of those people...

[Chris H]

For those who are candidates for NYO NCO and Conservatoires the distinction does matter, and just because a teacher doesn't attract that sort of pupil then you cannot just deny that it is a valid concern for those who do aspire to those things.

Well, I haven't said they don't matter (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

But I did!

[andante]

And I didn't say you couldn't get in without them. I just said that it was a valid concern, and certainly makes life easier when you don't have to keep asking your teacher for a letter of support. The view I was contesting was the one often stated on the forum that any pupil who wants to try to get a distinction clearly has a pushy parent behind them, has unreasonable expectations and is pointlessly devaluing the plain pass.

[VH2]

If there was only pass or fail, what do you think should be the pass mark? What about other exams with a range of pass grades - GCSEs, A levels, degrees?

If it were pass/fail there'd be no need for a mark.

I'm taking about the minimum score required to get a pass. Would you still use 100/150?

The candidate would never see a mark. How the examiners keep track is their business.

You would also be required to pass all components to get an overall pass

I completely agree, and I don't think the aural tests have any place in a test of competence in performing on an instrument. All that should matter is how well you play, irrespective of the skill set you used to achieve your level of performance. Probably sight-reading and performance should be separated too.

So having said you should have to get a pass in each section, you would actually only have one section, performing?

Are you trying to be perverse and argumentative? Or does it just seem that way because of the limitations of this form of communication?

Yes think it is not useful to have the sections we now have in the Grade exams. You can perform brilliantly yet do badly on the aural, scales and sight reading. Yet those three components are assessed at a quite superficial level compared to the performance part, so it is not a good test of general musicianship either.

But if we are to have several sections in the grade exams then I think you should have to show you are up to scratch in all of them.