to keep saxophonists happy....

This is precisely the reason why my "advanced" (post grade 5) brass students are moving over from AB to TG at the moment. With the new TG syllabus you can do the scale exercises and they can all see the point in them as the patterns are ones they come across regularly in pieces - where they have the music in front of them (you use the music in the TG exam for the scale exercises). They don't have to play F# melodic minor 2 octaves from memory when playing in their wind band, brass band etc

I've just been practicing my 4 octave scales for grade 6 piano, and I dont understand - surely if you can play 2, you can probably play three, and if you can play three, chances are, you could probably play 4!! I dont get it? It just seems like apointless excersise! As a woodwind teacher I completely understand why the octave requirments increase as the grades get higher as the pupil has to get around the reange of their instrument, but on the piano, all the notes are already there, the fingering is the same for the other three octaves you have just done - I JUST DONT GET IT!!!

In fact - just to add, I have just ordered the grade 6 book from trinity for this reason, the exams just make more sense musically than ABRSM ones do! They prepare you better for advanced repertoire as previous posts have stated.

To play 4 octave scales on the piano means being able to move up and down the keyboard a fiair way.
You need to move your body to do this, not just play the notes directly in front of you so it does need use a different skill from playing 2 octave scales.

I thought it said in the TG syllabus that the scale exercises were to be from memory? Up to (and including) grade 5 the scales alternative is scale exercises from memory plus a study. Grades 6 to 8 has Orchestral Extracts as the scales alternative. Or am I looking at the wrong syllabus?

In addition, the touch in the lower and higher registers is different from the middle.

SCALES (piano) – a question
I haven’t had much time recently to think seriously about scales so sorry to come back on this topic at a late stage. However, I would like to ask if the new scales for piano have definitely been decided upon and if so when will the new scale books be available ? Will candidates outside the UK have the option of playing the current scales for one more year, as they do the pieces ?

SCALES (piano) – a comment
I may be wrong but I can’t see real any difference in difficulty or in quantity between the current and the suggested syllabus. I suspect it may give rise to the same sort of complaints. I have no complaint about the standard of scale and arpeggio work expected but the quantity remains unrealistic for the higher grades which often coincide with heavy school homework loads.

SCALES – (recorder and flute) - a question
Are there any plans to revise the scales for these instruments

Question regarding Diplomas
---------------------------------

The Trinity examining board allow/require the candidate to submit their diploma programme for prior approval before the exam where own-choice repertoire is submitted. I feel this is an excellent idea.

The Associated Board currently offers no such option. Own-choice repertoire is allowed in all Diploma exams, but the candidate has to make sure it is "comparable in standard".

Imagine this situation. You're considering taking the FRSM examination. Your own-choice piece is on neither the LRSM or FRSM lists. You are of the opinion that it is comparable with many FRSM pieces, but then again there are some real hair-raisers on the LRSM list - is it really more difficult then those?

It becomes a considerable additional risk, both from the point of view of the time spent learning that piece and the financial cost of the exam, to submit this piece for your FRSM diploma. The examiner on the day might not agree that your piece is of FRSM standard and penalise you (p. 15 of the Diploma Syllabus: "Candidates ... offering an inappropriate standard of piece ... will be liable to penalty").

Where then is the incentive for a candidate to be creative in an FRSM programme? The lack of a prior approval mechanism will cause more candidates to choose pieces solely from the set repertoire. These exams cost serious money and the tendency is surely to play safe.

Fairly random example:

Mendelssohn's Fantasia Op 28. Marvellous piece. Now, is this work the same standard as the same composer's Andante and Rondo Capriccioso or Variations serieuses (both LRSM) or his Sonata Op 106 (FRSM). This of course is a matter of opinion, but it would be useful to know what this opinion is before being penalised in your examination when it is too late to change it.

The Chief Examiner's thoughts would be most welcome. Thanks in advance for your time.

I hope I'm not too late with this.

Questions for the examiner, relating to statistics for the number of people passing the grade exams:

1. How many cornet/trumpet/etc Grade 8 passes are there each year?

2. Same question for every other grade, and/or diplomas, licentiate, and fellowship - how many passes per year on each instrument?

3. What proportion of total UK exams are taken at AB? This will help me work out, eg. the total number of trumpet grade 8's each year in the country.

4. I understand AB used to publish the lists of passes, grouped by instrument. Why was this information withdrawn?

Many thanks.

I know that this is not related to any of your topics for discussion at the moment but I would really like the Board's opinion on the thread that I started in the Teachers Forum about exam books carrying a health warning. This title was chosen for shock value rather than anything else but I would really like the chief examiner to consider adding a note to the effect that grade exams are not in themselves intended as a course of study but as a means of being assessed at the end of a study period.

Hi everyone,

The new topics for your consideration when posing questions to Clara Taylor are the following:

1. Memorisation

This is currently a popular topic of debate on the General Music Forum. What is it useful for? Is it an essential or even desirable skill for a musician and why? Which aspects of musicianship, if any, are enhanced by the ability to memorise? Can this ability be taught? Ask Clara!

2. Learning Style

Is your approach to an exam the 'correct' one for you as an individual? Ask Clara for advice on practising scales, sight-reading, set pieces and aural skills!

NB (in response to comments below): These are suggested topics aimed at encouraging some initial questions, not imposing absolute restrictions on what can or cannot be asked. Please feel free to pose any question to Clara that you wish!

This is starting to sound more like a PR exercise than a place to ask genuine questions of the chief examiner...

Yes...are we limited to these two points? I want to raise a question about exam centres, but maybe I should put it on a thread instead.....

If this is the thread you're referring to: Memorising, Is It Taught Enough?, or is it a waste of time?, the poll there shows the following statistics as at today's date, based on 100 votes in each section of the poll:

84% of members think playing from memory should be taught better/earlier/more
13% don't agree with the above
3% don't know/don't care

There is currently an equal split of 47% For and 47% Against the ABRSM adding some requirement to play from memory in graded exams (6% don't know/don't care)

Some people have pointed out on the thread that there is already a requirement to play from memory in the form of scales, but the original poster was particularly referring to playing pieces.

I would like to ask Clara Taylor whether she sees any benefit in students being encouraged to learn how to memorise pieces right from the start of their learning. If so, does she think that to incorporate memorised pieces into the exam system right from Grade 1 level would facilitate this learning process, even if it only started with a few bars at Grade 1, with pieces gradually getting longer up the grades. And also whether the Board has any plans to introduce memorised pieces into the exam system.

Thank you

Good question Skylark .

On the subject of approaches to exams, another recent topic has highlighted once again the problem of people taking one exam after another and only learning 3 pieces, often spending a whole year doing so. Whilst it is clear from the AB's press output that this approach is not recommended: is the AB aware of how widespread this trend is? If it is increasing? And are there any possibilties of doing anything to further discourage (or prevent?) teachers using this style of learning? Or indeed to help teachers who are battling with exam driven parents?

About memorising, with regard to scales, would playing scales from the music not better serve the 'improving sight-reading' objective for including scales mentioned in last month's questions? The link to the written page is not there for the many out there who play scales from memory never looking at the book (although allowing the book in the exam would, of course, not force memorisers to actually use or ever look at it...). But post grade 5 theory people know the key signatures, so maybe the books could be allowed at grade 6 and above for those who find it troublesome. A memory test on a short piece would probably be more useful, interesting and enjoyable .

I think it would be wrong to include playing from memory in the syllabus - especially in the early grades. I feel it would further encourage teachers to teach by rote, which can be done up to about Grade 3, and discourage the teaching of sight-reading. Pupils who play largely from memory at this early stage will get by, but most will hit a brick wall at Grade 4 or 5, when there are simply too many notes for most of them to memorise. In the early grades, I feel very strongly that pupils should be encouraged to look at the music and know where thay are at all times. Perhaps at Grade 8, when a student is a potential public performer, requiring an awareness of concert-giving, the arguments might be different, but up to this point, I think it would be wrong.

About memorising, with regard to scales, would playing scales from the music not better serve the 'improving sight-reading' objective for including scales mentioned in last month's questions?

These were my thoughts too.

I think it would be wrong to include playing from memory in the syllabus - especially in the early grades. I feel it would further encourage teachers to teach by rote, which can be done up to about Grade 3, and discourage the teaching of sight-reading.

Yes. I agree with Dulciana that anything which encourages rote learning of exam pieces in the early grades is not likely to be a positive move.

You'd expect it but I think it's some way from being so in a lot of cases.

I entirely agree and would also like once more to point out the long term dangers if introducing a requirement to play exam pieces from memory. We will inevitably find ourselves teaching pieces chosen for their "memorability" - as happens in France. The teaching repertoire here for piano here is limited, trite and repetitive and I have heard many pieces played with technical bravura and well memorised - but precious little musical content in the music or the interpretation of it.

Please don't let's go down that path. In an exam system it would be bound to happen. Before long there would be people clamouring for pieces that are "easier to memorise" and we would lose the interesting variety of pieces on offer at the moment.

This is a request in the form of a question!

Could the full specifications of the minimum tempos for scales etc. be given in the syllabus?
Currently the full specifications are only given in the scale books for each grade.
This is awkward for people who don't want/need to buy the book for the grade they are taking.

I have previously obtained this information by asking people in this forum, but that doesn't
seem the best way to do this.
"These Music Exams" only gives tempos for some of the types of scales and arpeggios,
not all of them.

Thanks.

You are of course welcome to ask any question you like of Clara - the suggested topics are aimed at encouraging some initial questions rather than imposing absolute restrictions on what can and cannot be asked.

I must admit I'm a bit confused as to the nature of the thread. If it's thrown open to debate, then numerous topics could get debated within one thread, but they'd be all mixed up. As far as memorisation goes, there's already a current thread for debating the pros and cons, and I thought this thread was just for questions for the Chief Examiner rather than debate amongst ourselves? Would be grateful for clarification

Perhaps 'debate' is not the best word to use! What I should have said is that the suggested topics are designed to provoke and encourage some initial questions but that other queries are welcome. Some debate within the thread is fine but yes, the primary aim of this particular area is indeed to ask direct questions of Clara.

Yes that's clear now, thank you

I just wondered if the answers were already prepared and we've got to guess the questions, or you lot have that are teachers lol.

Yes, I too wondered about the amount of debate - to which I have contributed - but I think it is inevitable that if one person raises a question another might like to come in on another aspect of the question. Or if someone asks the Board to do something particular the next person might think that 's the last thing they want and hasten to put a counter question or argument. Thus several sides of a topic can be raised and so give the Chief Examiner a clearer idea of what different people are concerned or unsure about.

Okay, a question on an non-related topic:

a) Do you believe that there will inevitably be some variation in the technical difficulty of exam pieces on the same list in the same grade (i.e. A3 may well be easier than A1)? Or would you say all pieces are guaranteed to be of the same difficulty and it just depends on the individual player?

b) If there is some variation between pieces (if that isn't the case, then imagine it happened by mistake...) would examiners expect more musicality from a less technically difficult piece?

I ask because it is often suggested when people say piece 1 is technically harder than piece 2 that more musicality is expected in piece 2.

One about memory: why do singers have to memorise but no one else does?

To those with fears about playing by rote in the earlier grades: at what stage should memorising be introduced? It seems that suddenly implying it's necessary (depending on the instrument) at diploma level is rather being thrown in at the deep end.

This term there's been a lot of debate on various threads about how long the results were taking. We all accept the 'quality control' aspect, I think, but they do often still seem to take much longer than they really should.

For example, my pupils' jazz exams this term were held in Portland Place - the mark sheets didn't even initially need to be posted anywhere, but only had to go to another room in the same building. But the results didn't even go online until three weeks later!

And some of you may have read about how the results from my Visit for the other practical exams didn't arrive....and didn't arrive.....in the end I phoned up and was told that because one mark form had been returned to the examiner (it had been incorrectly added up), the whole batch had been held back - the other results had been ready to go out the previous week! I believe the procedure should have been that the remainder of the mark sheets and certs should have been posted out as soon as they were ready, with an explanatory letter enclosed about the missing result.......

Question about romantic pieces and small pupils

May I ask a question about List B pieces for piano? I have just posted in another thread “Grade 4” started by “Fantasia in P major” and would like to raise a point about romantic pieces. These naturally have a colourful harmonic vocabulary and often need sensitive pedalling. I have had pupils who like these pieces immensely even when they offer a real challenge. But there might be something to be said about the fact that if a younger child arrives at Grade 4 standard in all respects except size, then these pieces present extra difficulties. Could the Board include just one romantic piece in each B List (Grades 4 and 5 are where the problem seems to occur most) which doesn’t require big chords and a lot of legato pedalling. It doesn’t have to be easier in any other respect - it could well test other aspects of romantic style playing - but it would help those whose hands and legs haven’t yet grown enough.

The A and C lists are easier from this point of view and when notes have to be left out or pedalling limited the musical results are generally more satisfactory than with List B pieces.

Here's a question on the role of piano accompaniment in exams:

Discussion on another thread reminded me that most orchestral instrument exams require one or two pieces to be played with a live accompaniment (with the exception of jazz).

1) I'm curious why it is OK to play with a recorded CD accompaniment for jazz exams but not for ordinary grade exams. It really does seem odd, given the nature of jazz!

2) and more importantly, if it is so important for players of orchestral instruments to learn to play with accompaniment...why isn't it important for pianists to learn the skills of accompanying, or even just playing with other instrumentalists or vocalists (if only at higher grades)? I think that guitar syllabi include some accompanied pieces (though perhaps none where the examinee plays the accompaniment). I don't mean to sound stroppy, I just realized that the more I think about this, the more curious I am about this strange mismatch in required skills!

If this is a new game, then perhaps we should move this thread to the Cafe...

Learning style is an interesting aspect to all education, and ties in too with skill and talent mix; other boards have chosen to acknowledge that talent and skill mixes vary, and have much less of a "one size should fit all" approach - does the Board see its way through to adapting a little more to this idea? I don't believe this represents dumbing down, as there are aspects of musicality which are tested by other boards which have no place in the ABRSM syllabuses - sure, improvisation may be assessed in jazz exams, but not in the classical ones as Trinity does (this is only an example of what I mean, there are others). Teachers have to adapt their approach to the particular capabilities of their pupils, why can't exams also provide a more balanced assessment of their efforts? I accept the need for a basic level which needs to be reached for each grade, but there has been an element of choice in exam papers for school qualifications for decades...even going back to the times when success rates were very much lower than they are today (ie you can't even fire out the usual complaints of dumbing down to justify the rigid structure of music exams).

Is it possible for a CD to be produced by ABRSM for the guitar or other less "popular" instruments for listening to good performances. This would also help when making the choice of pieces for exam music. As a spin off it might also encourage more players to learn these instruments.

I expect, given that Christine said the AB make a loss on the CD material produced so far, even for the popular instruments, that the restrictions on this one would be that it would cost a lot to do so, unfortunately.

A question relating to younger candidates in exams: it's easy to be impressed by a young child showing technical competence to the high grade levels. Indeed it's often said that there is a big step to be made to move from child prodigy (where everyone is simply impressed that one can play the thing) to true artist, which many cannot make. I notice in the last month's response that you said there are certainly no deliberate concessions towards younger candidates (which is very pleasing to see). Examiners being human, however, do you think it's possible that a young candidate could be advantaged at the higher grades (or especially diploma levels) simply because their technical abilities may seem more overwhelming? Taking advantage of the 'child prodigy' type effect and getting more marks, rather than having the artistry that one would notice to be lacking in an older player? Even if the difference were small, say the age provides the 'wow' factor that could make the difference between getting 29 or 30 for a piece.

Do you know of any control experiments that have been done, or have the AB done any, with adjudicators/examiners listening to recordings of exams but not actually being told who is playing (or how old they are) to investigate this?

Another question relating to past exam syllabuses: the AB owns the copyright to the old syllabuses, but I notice that they don't publish the list as an entire collection over several decades anywhere. Many people are very interested in this information, either to find out how difficult a certain piece is; for repertoire suggestions at a certain leve; or maybe just to remember what they played for their grade 1 all those years ago! Since the AB hold the copyright I believe they are the only ones that could compile a list (or at least compiling a list would requrie their permission). Is there a reason, other than the obvious work involved in compiling such a list, that the AB doesn't publish this information? Obviously the information is published seperately in previous years if one digs out the old syllabuses, but the information is not available together in coherent form, and not many people have the older syllabuses around.

I've just posted in the Theory forum to ask for suggestions on how to learn theory terms. If Clara or Debbie has any suggestions, it would be much appreciated!

Just thought of two more questions:

1) Don't know if you're in charge of theory as well but... Presumably, although there are no right or wrong answers, there are guidelines to examiners (i.e. some sort of mark scheme) for how marks are awarded for the questions (adding chords, figured bass, composition etc.) in the higher theory grades. As far as I'm aware these are not made available to teachers or students (although I have seen a scheme somewhere for the grade 5 composition question). Is this a deliberate omission, through fear that the exams would be made too easy if the students knew how they were marked, or would the AB consider publishing the marking guidelines (should they exist) so that teachers have a better idea of what to aim for on these grades?

2) If a piece appears on one grade and then a lower grade 20 years later, what would be your response to the oft made statement that the exams are therefore being 'dumbed down'?

That happened to me once. I made the suggestion as per your last sentence...lo and behold all except the rogue one arrive the next day, and we waited a further ten days for it. Something to do with common sense, methinks!

Will there be, perhaps sometime in the near future, traditional music exams. eg. Scots fiddle, scots flute (simple or boehm) bagpipes etc. It seems like there is a gaping hole in this area!

Would be interesting to hear your opinion on some of the issues of recent debate here:

• How good do you think examiners at picking up what's caused by nerves and what's not? Do you think most candidates who are well enough prepared will be spotted by examiners as pass worthy but nervous?
• Is it possible for someone to claim they are grade X standard without taking the exam?
• What does having passed a grade tell us about someone's playing? For example the marks could be 30,30,30 + the minimum allowed to be awarded for the other sections; or could be 13, 13, 14 plus full marks for the other sections; so we can we, in fact, conclude anything certain from an exam pass?
• Further to that: you have often said the supporting tests are there because all-round musicianship is important; what do you think of the suggestion that candidates should have to pass all sections of the exam to pass it?

Sorry to be boring you with questions on the supporting tests all the time.
I think most people can understand the reasoning behind the majority of the tests.I can see the argument for sight reading and the D section of the aural, scales are fairly obvious and the C section is understandable, all of which contribute to forming a well rounded musician as you said.
But i've never been able to work out the justifcation behind the A and B sections of the aural.
So in what way do those components help in forming a rounded musician, when in all likelihood an instrumentalist will never require the skills they seem to teach?

Can I use a 5 string viola (strung C,G,D,A,E) for a grade exam?

Yes I asked the question last time and got the above non-reply which I put down to having slightly generalised the question. So this time I am asking precisely about the instrument I want to know about in the hope that it can be one of the cases in the "case by case basis" and then I (and others who I know would be interested) will have an answer.


But thanks YAP for being helpful and hunting down the previous post.

Can I ask a question about what seems to be an anomaly in the G4 Theory syllabus....

The First Steps book says the following about Ornaments (p99):

"The names which you should use in the examination for the ornament signs are given below. (More will be said about their names in the Grade 5 section of this book, where there will also be an explanation of how the signs are interpreted.)"

It then gives a "dictionary definition" of the signs, but not how you interpret them.... because it's just said that that comes in Grade 5.


BUT, in the Music Theory in Practice workbook for G4, one of the exercises (#37 in Section K) asks very detailed questions about how different ornaments require passages to be played. How can we answer those questions when "the explanation of how the signs are interpreted" isn't covered until G5 and elsewhere it says that we only need to know the names.

Edit: Exercise 42 in Section N also asks detailed questions on how to play an ornament


Clarification would be appreciated please

On another thread there have been some enquiries about the percentage rate of passes for the grades. Car Expert showed us where to find them on the site but they seem only to be for the UK. Are there statistics available for other countries please? It would be nice for those of us outside the UK to have some feedback for European countries and the rest of the world.

I agree it's a non-reply. What counts as a non-standard instrument? Five string double basses are commonly seen in orchestras yet presumably if they are strung with a high solo string they would make things very much easier for some high grades pieces. What about the Modern Alto recorder which makes top F sharp possible without use of the knee? And if that is permissible then what about the Helder recorder where you can actually change dynamics but it is beginning to look rather more like a clarinet? I'm sure there are similar developments in other isntruments, and why shouldn't there be?

Liz

There's a thread about the order in which teachers put candidates on application forms - what would examiners prefer? To have all the candidates grouped by grades, or mixed up to vary the process a bit? And highest levels first or last?

This is rather a prosaic question about the theory exam ..... I know that rough paper is given but is it OK to jot a few workings down on the paper itself, provided that they don't affect the clarity/legibility of the answer, or would we be penalised for doing this?

I'd like to ask if there's any thoughts about extending the Jazz Woodwind Syllabi up to Grade 8?