Sightreading Test, How much of it can you run through? Options

[Czerny]

Thanks everyone! I still feel this is rather a mixed bag of responses - some saying you can play as much as you like and some saying that this has back-fired occasionally. I did read something a while back on this forum where a pupil had a go at the sightreading and the examiner then took that as the performance - which meant she didn't do as well as she could have done. As the teacher, I really want to give my pupils the best advice and avoid anything unexpected like that - or as AliciaOcean says above - their being told off for playing too much!

I am inclined to stick with my current process - advising that they pretend to play it - without pressing down the keys - and maybe play a tricky bit for real.

As people are not entirely in agreement as to how much you are allowed to play in the preparation time, why not contact the Board and ask them directly to confirm the regulation definitively? And then you can report back and tell us all what we should be advising our pupils.

(Alternatively you could read 35 different opinions and then go back to doing exactly what you were doing anyway... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif))

[Aquarelle]

Against my advice some of my younger pupils (boys!) try to play the whole thing through very fast so as to get through it once in 30 seconds. This, of course does not work.
It takes most of my Grade 1 pupils a full 30 seconds and more to find the starting position of each hand. They are amazed that it is then too late to do anything else.

As far as I know you can spend your 30 seconds doing anything you like(!). I am the world's worst teacher when it comes to sight reading. Well, either that or I've got the world's worst pupils. Last week I spent a lot of time saying encouragingly "Well, it wasn't a complete disaster."

30 seconds is far too short. It should be a minute for Grades 1 and 2, a minute and a half for Grades 3 and 4 and two minutes for the rest. That would be much more like real life. But then I suppose we would have to pay more for longer exams.

[morceau]

Thanks everyone! I still feel this is rather a mixed bag of responses - some saying you can play as much as you like and some saying that this has back-fired occasionally. I did read something a while back on this forum where a pupil had a go at the sightreading and the examiner then took that as the performance - which meant she didn't do as well as she could have done. As the teacher, I really want to give my pupils the best advice and avoid anything unexpected like that - or as AliciaOcean says above - their being told off for playing too much!

I am inclined to stick with my current process - advising that they pretend to play it - without pressing down the keys - and maybe play a tricky bit for real.

As people are not entirely in agreement as to how much you are allowed to play in the preparation time, why not contact the Board and ask them directly to confirm the regulation definitively? And then you can report back and tell us all what we should be advising our pupils.

(Alternatively you could read 35 different opinions and then go back to doing exactly what you were doing anyway... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif))

Point taken Czerny (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
To be honest - I assumed that everyone knew far better than me and I would be given a definitive guide.

Aquarelle - It may be that your younger pupils just don't realise how fast the time is passing. I remember having no idea how long 30 seconds lasted and having no clue how much I could get done in the time. At first, I give them a running commentary on what to do in what order - pushing them to get their hands in position quickly and then what to look for next, telling them when 15 seconds is up etc. We start with a minute and gradually work down to 30 seconds. I find that this helps them to get the measure of how fast to work. It doesn't always work though! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

[Czerny]

It takes most of my Grade 1 pupils a full 30 seconds and more to find the starting position of each hand. They are amazed that it is then too late to do anything else.

I sometimes take a page or two of sight-reading tests and simply go from one to the next seeing how quickly they can find the hand positions, making sure they understand that the number on its own does not tell them which note to play. Certainly in Grades 1 and 2 it's half the battle if they start in the correct position (and a bit of a disaster if they don't!).

I also tell them to take a "snapshot" of the beginning of the piece as quickly as possible, encompassing tempo / character (i.e. "Like a march"), key, time sig, hand pos, opening dynamic. Then scan through the rest of the piece looking for any patterns, jumps, tricky rhythms, dynamic changes and articulation.

My other "tip" is to concentrate on the broad picture of the dynamics so there is some variation even if they don't manage to get all the subtleties.

[morceau]

I have just had this response from the ABRSM.


"Thank you for your email. Candidates have 30 seconds to look through and play through the test they are given as they wish. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further queries.

Kind regards,

Sara Trepte

Administrative Assistant, Syllabus

ABRSM"

I'm very happy about this. I was clearly being overcautious in the past.

[Aquarelle]

It takes most of my Grade 1 pupils a full 30 seconds and more to find the starting position of each hand. They are amazed that it is then too late to do anything else.

I sometimes take a page or two of sight-reading tests and simply go from one to the next seeing how quickly they can find the hand positions, making sure they understand that the number on its own does not tell them which note to play. Certainly in Grades 1 and 2 it's half the battle if they start in the correct position (and a bit of a disaster if they don't!).

Yes, I do that too and I also have a very nice old fashioned "clock face" stopwatch which I use to time them and let them play about with so that they get some idea of the length of time 30 seconds represents. This all helps but I still think 30 seconds is too short for the early grades - especially as some of the children doing these grades are quite young.

Off topic but still about time passing: ten weeks before an exam I give the younger ones a picture of a rocket with sections on it showing a count down to zero. Each week they colour in a section so they start to understand that time does pass and that you can't procrastinate for ever because lift off will eventually arrive. They like this and it does help to focus them.

[Belinda]

My son has done 15 abrsm graded exams (Grade 2 in violin and recorder, 1-7 piano and 1-8 flute (skipped 6). up til and including grade 5 he always played through the test. He always got distinction, in every exam , and no-one ever told him not to just play through. Th examiner always indicated when time was up and that the real attempt was now to be played. grade 6+, he didnt have time so looked for repeated bits etc. About to do Dip AbrsM in flute - sight-reading rather longer....

[Czerny]

Off topic but still about time passing: ten weeks before an exam I give the younger ones a picture of a rocket with sections on it showing a count down to zero. Each week they colour in a section so they start to understand that time does pass and that you can't procrastinate for ever because lift off will eventually arrive. They like this and it does help to focus them.

I love that idea! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Czerny]

I have just had this response from the ABRSM.


"Thank you for your email. Candidates have 30 seconds to look through and play through the test they are given as they wish. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further queries.

Kind regards,

Sara Trepte

Administrative Assistant, Syllabus

ABRSM"

I'm very happy about this. I was clearly being overcautious in the past.

See Post #10... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/happy.gif)

[morceau]

I have just had this response from the ABRSM.


"Thank you for your email. Candidates have 30 seconds to look through and play through the test they are given as they wish. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further queries.

Kind regards,

Sara Trepte

Administrative Assistant, Syllabus

ABRSM"

I'm very happy about this. I was clearly being overcautious in the past.

See Post #10... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/happy.gif)

Yeah, yeah, OK OK, many thanks to Czerny - who was right all along. I will know who to listen to in future (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[vectistim]

1. Tempo, time signature, key signature (title, if applicable)
3. Get hands/fingers in right position for the start

To help with the key signature and the right position a quick octave scale, or an arpeggio can help, and can help to remind the fingers when to aim at a black not.

[linda.ff]

Thanks everyone! I still feel this is rather a mixed bag of responses - some saying you can play as much as you like and some saying that this has back-fired occasionally. I did read something a while back on this forum where a pupil had a go at the sightreading and the examiner then took that as the performance - which meant she didn't do as well as she could have done.

If I found out immediately after an exam that this had happened to one of my students a complaint would go in well be fore the issue of results.

Yes, I think that was mine at grade 1. I asked her if she wanted me to complain and she said no. It was only years later that she admitted to me that she had been upset by it. Normally used to get 19 or 20 for sight-reading.

The trouble with looking for the awkward bits in the sight-reading is that you often don't know which are the awkward bits till you hit them. They're not always the bits with more ink per square cm!

[randomsabreur]

I can usually spot potential banana skins on a quick scan... (flute) But 30 seconds is unbelieveably quick - I run out of time far too quickly.

My list of things to do is:

1: Key signature- check first and final notes and quick scan for accidentals to get an idea of key and minor /major. Spot any nice scale/arpeggio passages
2. Time signature - and check for triplets/fiddly rhythms/ grouping if an uneven time sig (5/4 or similar)
3. Quick scan for notes with lots of ledger lines
4. Establish rhythm of 1st couple of bars in my head - pick nice "safe" speed and try to get time in my head
5. Finger through first couple of bars and last bar in rhythm (by now probably out of time)
6. If time, play a bar or two with a clear rhythm to firmly establish chosen beat
7. Keep chosen beat in head and finger through potential banana skins

Hope for the best, and try and end at the right time on the right note.

[linda.ff]

I can usually spot potential banana skins on a quick scan... (flute) But 30 seconds is unbelieveably quick - I run out of time far too quickly.

I did approach the Board about this, maybe as much as 20 years ago.

In those days the performance section of GCSE music included unprepared performance and one option was sight-reading. They were invited to play through the test twice (though with no appreciable "preparation" time) and were then marked on the better of the two. I asked the Board if they didn't think this would perhaps be a good option, since it would probably not take up much more time, if any. Their response was that it wasn't always easy to assess which of the two was the "better" (??just give them both marks and use the higher of the two??) and that often candidates tried it through once with one set of mistakes and a proper play-through with a completely different set of errors. I can't see what that had to do with the decision.

How often, in "real life", do you need to play something at sight?

1.When you're playing with other people (orchestra, chamber music or accompanying), which means you can't stop and correct - if you get hopelessly lost (not your place in the music, but your place on the instrument) you're likely to stop playing for a beat or two until you find your way back in. You don't really do that in a sight-reading test, though, marking time like that. The second time you try it, hwever, you may well fare better. I tell my pupils that what's really important in sight-reading is what happens the second time
(The exception to this is if you play for dance classes, when you [/i]have[i] to go on playing even if you've got into entirely the wrong position, as the rhythm is all-important, but then you wouldn't normally have that job unless you were a fairly proficient sight-reader.
or
2.When you're playing by yourself, usually to start learning the piece. There - though I'm ready for all the posts from people who say they don't do this - the odd mistake probably doesn't matter, but if you've wandered off in the wrong direction, you'd be more likely to re-start again at the beginning of a phrase, wouldn't you?

I have certainly met one person who said she always looked through a piece she was going to sight-read for herself, before ever putting her fingers on the piano, but when I asked why she thought that was better, she said it was good practice for when she had to do it in the exam. Which I thought was rather putting the cart before the horse.

When I'm trying it at home for myself for the first time, I'll always go straight into a piece, taking in the tempo, key-signature, time-signature etc "on the fly", and work out how to play it as I'm going along. Then do it again better.

[Czerny]

I asked the Board if they didn't think this would perhaps be a good option, since it would probably not take up much more time, if any. Their response was that it wasn't always easy to assess which of the two was the "better"...

This seems a somewhat peculiar response from an organisation, a large proportion of whose existence is based around assessing the relative and comparitive merits of different performances of pieces of music. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)