Ask The Chief Examiner Response - October 2009 Options

[EdGJ]

1. I would like to request an explanation as to why so many scales must be memorised. I find it hard to memorise so many.

The new syllabus has reduced the number of technical requirements in some grades. Years ago, when I [Clara] took the exams, there were many more scales and it is important to have both the understanding and physical memory of the keys relevant to each grade. The best way to absorb them is to practice a very small number at a time, so as not to confuse the patterns.

2. In the aural section, why does someone learning violin, like myself, have to sing back notes played on a piano? I simply do not see the point in it. I am not doing a singing exam after all.

and

3. As there's some quite heated discussion re: the aural part of the tests, can I ask if there is any likelihood of the relevance of sight-singing being reviewed for practical exams other than voice?

Nigel Scaife, Syllabus Director: As part of our recent review of aural training resources (of which more in January’s Libretto), we have considered this aspect of the aural tests in some depth. We recognize that occasionally there are candidates for whom singing is a difficult activity, especially for adolescents whose voices are changing. However, examiners are trained to be sensitive to this and to accommodate the candidate’s singing range, transposing the musical material when necessary, and the tests themselves cover only a limited pitch range. This is to enable all candidates to respond comfortably, without any strain to their voice. For those not used to singing, or who are unwilling to do so, there is the option of either whistling or humming. In fact, in my experience, humming often provides the best results. For any test which requires a ‘sung’ response, the focus of assessment is entirely on the ability to reproduce the correct pitches and rhythms, rather than the vocal quality.

However, we also believe that singing provides an excellent way to develop and assess a student’s listening skills and what is commonly called the ‘musical ear’. This is because singing makes the vital connection between the internal imagining of sound – the ‘inner ear’ - and the external creation of it in a very direct way. With singing there is no need to physically ‘find the note’ on an instrument (important though that connection is), which can get in the way of expressing musical ideas that have been internalised, and in turn affect assessment.

Being able both to internalise music through ‘hearing it in your head’ and to externalise it by reproducing what has been heard is an invaluable asset in developing a musician’s general awareness. To start with, in the early grades, it is all about imitating musical material that has just been heard. This ability to do this is a vital skill for the developing musician, as without it one could not learn to discriminate, to recognise similarity or difference, or to develop the ability to think in sound - sometimes called ‘audiation’. Audiation is the mental process by which the brain gives meaning to music, in the same way as thought brings meaning to language. Through ‘thinking in music’ students learn to understand it, and with understanding comes the appreciation that leads to a love of music.

When reading notation, thinking in music involves the ability to internalise the sound separately from the physical act of performance. This skill can be neglected when notation is introduced, because the symbols become simply instructions on where to place the fingers. When sight-reading, students who are unable to audiate effectively will typically be able to play the correct pitches, but will not communicate the rhythmic elements of the music accurately.

The ability to read notation and be able internally to imagine the sound it represents is vital for the well-rounded musician. It closely relates to the ability to detect errors and to be able to correct mistakes made in the process of learning new music. This begins with the ability to hear in your head and evaluate a single melodic line, so at Grades 4 and 5 the test is purely one of sight-singing a series of intervals, without any rhythmic basis. This is extended in the higher grades when the element of rhythm is introduced and the examiner accompanies the singing.

ABRSM aural tests are all about the assessment of a candidate’s ‘musical ear’. Having a good musical ear impacts on all aspects of musicianship. Singing, both silently in the head as well as out loud, is one of the best ways to develop and assess it and for this reason we want to encourage it for all musicians.

4. Are there any plans to offer the jazz exams in other countries (e.g. Italy!)?

We are in fact holding jazz exams in India for the first time in 2010 and we continually assess and respond to local demand for all our exam and assessment offerings. If we do perceive that local enthusiasm exists for a particular product and the resources are available there is a good chance that we will introduce it!

5. Are there any plans to extend online registration for exams to other countries?

We do hope to extend the current online registration facility to incorporate other countries in the future. However, this will depend on whether it is possible to set up local payment systems in order for applicants to pay their examination fees by credit card online. You can share your views with us here.

6. I was wondering what steps one should take to become an ABRSM examiner? What qualifications are needed and (I hope you don't mind me asking) what are the salary ranges?

We are looking for experienced musicians with broadly based understanding of the orchestral instruments and a high level of personal achievement. Then there are the all-important 'people skills' needed to put candidates at ease. The process of interview, selection and training is rigorous and ensures that the next generation of examiners offers consistent service at the highest level. Our recent podcast discusses how to become an ABRSM examiner in further detail.

7. I have almost completed the first year of a music diploma at the OU and was wondering about Grade 5 exemption (theory). The course is ‘A214: Understanding music’ and covers theory beyond Grade 5. Does ABRSM recognise this qualification and provide exemption from Grade 5?

We do indeed accept this qualification as an alternative to Grade 5 Theory. We also accept Grade 5 Practical Musicianship and Grade 5 in a solo Jazz subject as prerequisites for Practical Grades 6 and above.

8. One question I'd like to ask: do you think it'd be a good idea to introduce an Orchestral Extracts element to the Grade 6-8 exams, as Trinity Guildhall do as an option for their exams?

Robert Sargant, Syllabus Manager: We do currently feature specialist options within our diploma exams (LRSM and FRSM), giving candidates the opportunity to present orchestral excerpts as part of their diploma, but at present we do not have any plans to introduce this option into our graded syllabuses.

[Dulciana]

With regard to Point 2 in the response above, can I ask if the detailed response next week will refer directly to points and questions raised in the recent thread/poll on singing in aural tests? Will there be a direct response to the issue raised that hearing pitches does not necessarily logically mean that the individual will be able to reproduce them with his/her voice? I'm not meaning to reopen this discussion here, as that would be inappropriate, but I think many of us would like to know that the response is to general thinking amongst teachers as well as a direct response to this specific question. Will our arguments be taken on board?

[EdGJ]

With regard to Point 2 in the response above, can I ask if the detailed response next week will refer directly to points and questions raised in the recent thread/poll on singing in aural tests? Will there be a direct response to the issue raised that hearing pitches does not necessarily logically mean that the individual will be able to reproduce them with his/her voice? I'm not meaning to reopen this discussion here, as that would be inappropriate, but I think many of us would like to know that the response is to general thinking amongst teachers as well as a direct response to this specific question. Will our arguments be taken on board?

Hi Dulciana (and others),

An extended response to two recently posed questions about the aural exam component can now be found above.

Thanks,

Ed

[barry-clari]

Just a general 'thank you' for the responses above. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Will be interested to see what the changes to the aural tests will be...

[anacrusis]

Seems to me that the answers are just a reiteration of dogma, with little indication that objections have even been noted or considered. Certainly I can see nothing which attempts to address those objections directly: it'd certainly be interesting to know if the number of candidates finding particular areas of the syllabus to be a major put-off are really only so small as to be "occasional". How do we know that singing is the best way to internalise music - has a comparison ever been made?

*returns to her book about alternative medicine, in which the case is very strongly made for looking for an evidence base for any intervention*

[sarah123]

I was wondering if we might get some answers to any of the other questions that have been asked over the last year or so?

A clarification of the sight-reading requirements for the grades 6-8 recorder exams would be particularly nice. (ie which type of recorder, do you get to choose, etc.)

Sarah

[briantrumpet]

Seems to me that the answers are just a reiteration of dogma, with little indication that objections have even been noted or considered.

I'd agree - this is a very disappointing response - disappointing not so much because the AB haven't changed their mind, but because they have not had the courage to meet head on the arguments about fairness, relevance and accuracy of assessment.

There are better ways to encourage the love of singing than its inclusion in instrumental exams, and there are better ways to test aural skills than singing.

[kenm]

The ability to read notation and be able internally to imagine the sound it represents is vital for the well-rounded musician. It closely relates to the ability to detect errors and to be able to correct mistakes made in the process of learning new music.

I believe both these statements, although I have never come across a study that demonstrated the correlation. What the ABRSM should be able to demonstrate is that both these are so closely correlated to sight singing, whistling or humming ability that a test based on the last can be made an accurate test of the others, which is not intuitively obvious, to say the least.

[Dulciana]

The ability to read notation and be able internally to imagine the sound it represents is vital for the well-rounded musician. It closely relates to the ability to detect errors and to be able to correct mistakes made in the process of learning new music.

I believe both these statements, although I have never come across a study that demonstrated the correlation. What the ABRSM should be able to demonstrate is that both these are so closely correlated to sight singing, whistling or humming ability that a test based on the last can be made an accurate test of the others, which is not intuitively obvious, to say the least.

Absolutely!

Is the AB suggesting that because we don't thing singing is the best way for aural awareness to be tested, that we don't think that this:

The ability to read notation and be able internally to imagine the sound it represents is vital for the well-rounded musician. It closely relates to the ability to detect errors and to be able to correct mistakes made in the process of learning new music

is the case?

Do they think we're idiots? Either that, or they just haven't listened to the arguments at all. It's quite insulting for it to be implied that we don't agree with the above, when it is they, and not us, who have missed the point!

[saxophile]

[The ability to read notation and be able internally to imagine the sound it represents is vital for the well-rounded musician.

This explanation puzzles me in the context of the lower grades (1-3), where no notation at all is provided for the aural tests! Personally, I find singing a phrase from notation (or identifying a discrepancy between the notation in front of me and what I hear played) far easier than trying to do it by ear, as required at Grades 1-3. Add to that the requirement that the singing element be in strict time within the 2-bar gap - so no time to gather one's thoughts, or get the phrase clear in one's "inner musical ear" - and the test becomes really exceptionally difficult.

Overall, I cannot see that the explanation provided actually fits with the form of the tests as they currently stand.

[Dulciana]

[The ability to read notation and be able internally to imagine the sound it represents is vital for the well-rounded musician.

This explanation puzzles me in the context of the lower grades (1-3), where no notation at all is provided for the aural tests! Personally, I find singing a phrase from notation (or identifying a discrepancy between the notation in front of me and what I hear played) far easier than trying to do it by ear, as required at Grades 1-3. Add to that the requirement that the singing element be in strict time within the 2-bar gap - so no time to gather one's thoughts, or get the phrase clear in one's "inner musical ear" - and the test becomes really exceptionally difficult.

Overall, I cannot see that the explanation provided actually fits with the form of the tests as they currently stand.

This test would be useful if wanting to audition young children for a primary school choir... maybe there was a mistake at the printer's and it made it into the wrong book and it was just easier to keep it there rather than waste the money reprinting them all, and it's just been there ever since...Sometimes I think this is all a bit like The Emperor'e New Clothes... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ph34r.gif)

[Martin.Walters]

Seems to me that the answers are just a reiteration of dogma, with little indication that objections have even been noted or considered.

I'd agree - this is a very disappointing response - disappointing not so much because the AB haven't changed their mind, but because they have not had the courage to meet head on the arguments about fairness, relevance and accuracy of assessment.

There are better ways to encourage the love of singing than its inclusion in instrumental exams, and there are better ways to test aural skills than singing.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) Aural tests should be listening based, that's what aural means! If they must include a singing element, then singing back a melody is sufficient. Instrumentalists having to sight-sing is simply an unfair test. Singers get to sight-sing twice, on the instrument being examined, the voice. As the voice is taught and tested as an instrument, then it is unfair to make non-singers do a sight reading test on their chosen instrument and then have to do a sight-singing test on what is effectively a different instrument. Singers practise sight-singing in the same way a pianist would practice sight-reading. Why should instrumentalists be discriminated against by having to learn to sight-sing on a 2nd instrument. If instrumentalists must use two instruments in the course of a practical exam, then why can't singers do a sight-reading test on the piano? How about options to each test and then the ABRSM will see how popular sight-singing really is! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) A far more useful test of aural is to give the student a copy of a piece played by the examiner for them to identify several changes, similar to the final test in a practical musicianship exam. Being able to see the difference between what a student is playing and what exactly they should be playing is a much more necessary skill to develop than being able to sing random notes!

As for the comment on scales. There is no significant reduction in the endless list of scales required for pianists from grade 5. In fact the recent revision of the technical requirements for this grade has seen an increase from 2 to 3 octaves for arpeggios. LCM have a shorter list of scales and TG only ask for 2 major and minor keys. Given that and the 'being forced to sing' element, most of my students have chosen to do TG exams or LCM. This time last year, I had 13 candidates entered for AB exams, this term I have only 1. From reading this forum, I know there are other teachers who have students doing the same.

When you say only 2 minor and Major Keys, are the keys specified or are they random ? ~ How many keys will ABRSM be likely to ask me to play?

I have looked through the grade 5 syllabus for ABRSM and im hopefully going for my grade 3 in first quarter of new year, and decided to start learning 3 octaves in scales and will do in every new one I learn ,
Arpeggios may take a little longer. I only just got the hang of playing them hands together.

I may send you a PM sometime to noodle.. You have much wisdom !

[notmusimum]

We recognize that occasionally there are candidates for whom singing is a difficult activity, especially for adolescents whose voices are changing. However, examiners are trained to be sensitive to this and to accommodate the candidate’s singing range

What a hoot!! Do the examiners really receive training on how to deliver Aural. Based on recent experience it doesn't appear that they all do.

I think AB have major problems taking responsibility for anything. They are incapable of change because the exams as they stand work but they only work for AB.

[Suepea]

As a string player I find the ability to sight sing (usually in my head) is invaluable for sight reading. It is not so valuable in a practical way for players of instruments who do not have to find the right pitches, but it certainly helps in Theory when you have to compose an answering phrase in the earlier grades and do harmony later on. Having said this, I agree that there are many people who cannot reproduce the note that they have heard, even though they may be hearing it correctly. In Prep Test and from grade 4 you are allowed to play it on your instrument as an alternative to singing. It seems illogical that you cannot do this at grades 1 to 3.

[maggiemay]

............