I recently took on a new pupil two weeks before her Grade 4 exam; she'd been put in for it by her previous teacher. She just scraped through; if she'd been my pupil at the time I wouldn't have dreamt of putting her in as she just wasn't ready. Anyway, OK she passed, but I was amazed to read in the comments something like 'so now you can go full speed ahead towards Grade 5'. I thought 'whaaaat???'

Is it really recommended practice to go straight for the next grade when you've only just scraped the last one by a few marks? In other words, should an examiner be recommending this? She wants to start working towards Grade 5 sooner rather than later but I'd much rather get her playing other repertoire for a while to build up her technique and sort out all her flaws before even looking at the next grade.

What do others here think?

Well, I suppose that more students taking exams means more work for examiners and therefore more pay.

I can see the motive

But yeah - I agree with you. Most at least put something to improve before the next grade.

I thought it was more a positive statement, as in working towards, not necessearily at Gr5.

It's just the next thing to aim at.

I don't think I've ever had one that even mentions the next grade. It's usually been just very generic comments like "well-prepared work" or "well done". The most detailed one I've ever had was one that I scraped through, where the examiner basically pointed out that my musicianship was fine but I hadn't prepared my pieces very well, which I guess could be interpreted as advice to prepare better next time. But other than that, it's always been pretty vague and certainly concerned with the exam I'd done rather than with whatever I might go on to do next.

T.

I've had remarks (for students) along the lines of

"with a bit more xxxx and xxxxx and attention to xxxx you'll get the merit you deserve next time".

But I would feel like Violinia does, if I'd taken on a student entered as I saw it inappropriately for an exam, looking forward to the chance to build repertoire and work on technique and other skills once the exam was over, only to have them told "push on towards the next one"

Once a pupil has been told that they can/ should press on with the next grade, they go home, tell the parents, then phone calls from parents asking when will so and so will be entered for the next exam. I had two pupils when I took over from another teacher who had been told that they would definitely be entered for grade 4 and 5 by the end of 2007. I wasnt confident at all that either of them would pass, and indeed, neither did.

Examiners really need to think about what they write on the crit cheats so as not to give the wrong impression to parents and candidate (ie, sounding like they are telling the pupil to press on and do grade 5 next session).

Who wouldn't agree with this statement!!!!

My daughter scraped a Merit in her G5 Oboe, the examiner was really harsh and everyone had low marks. He put on the bottom of her comment sheet "you are well placed for the higher grades". I'm sorry but....you gave her a Merit!!! As the results almost took 5 weeks she and her teacher have already decided what they are working on and his comments won't change that.

Maybe the examiner was being sarcastic, implying that she'd rushed into grade 4? That's how I read it at first.

Not a very professional comment to make, either way. I suppose they were trying to be encouraging and suggest that grade 5 was at least within the student's capabilities. And he does say "full speed ahead TOWARDS grade 5", not "full speed ahead WITH grade 5". Probably too subtle for the pupil to appreciate the difference though.

As someone who's done a lot of examining, not in music I admit, I see this comment very differently.

Examing loads of students one after the other can get very boring, especially after you've had to do this after getting up at an ungodly hour to catch a train to a Univerity in a different part of the country. Don't underestimate how hard it is to sit there interviewing the 15th Student of the day, and trying to discuss a presentation that you heard earlier that day which was one of a series of 20, all different from each other (but all the same too in many ways). You then have to fill in the examiners report and the student feed back form, and try to think up yet another nice encouraging comment to round it off.

The examiner probably gave it no thought whatsoever apart from "I'll have to write something different here again", and I suspect they'd be amazed to find out that the comment was being agonised over and discussed in this way.

An interesting response StuMac that I'm inclined to agree with. It's like writing an email (or a response on these forums!) - you know what you mean but how often has the person receiving it read something completely different!

I've also had examiners make comments like "now onto Grade... etc" and I've always seen that as positive. The wise teacher interprets the examiners comments clearly to pupil and, where appropriate, parent. If you don't see parent, then write something to them in the next report of whatever. I always tell my pupils if they get these remarks that the examiner was encouraging them to keep going - that's what I think they mean.

As to being ready for more senior exams having "only" got a Merit - I think that's fine too. To get a Merit at Grade 5 is an excellent achievement and, for me, it would say you are ready to move on to prepare for the next level. It's a shame when people think you must get Distinction to succeed and be ready. If you pass Grade 5 you're ready to move on - in my book, at least, it's only if you fail that there are questions to be asked.

A merit at Grade 5 is an excellent achievement. Have to admit that I was mad at the examiner in the context of these exams and not implying that a Merit can't be moved on from. I was angry at the comment from this particular examiner as he was very harsh and not examiners in general.

I can see that the examiners lot can't be easy, I've been in that situation myself, but if odd comments are ignored it will end up like present day school reports where the comments are general and bland. As a paying customer I would want meaningful comments and positive suggestions on where improvements can be made, regardless of final mark or result, or aspects of the exam which are weak, not trite patronisations.

Sorry if I sound harsh as I say I'm just angry after two seperate cases of feeling my child has been let down by ABRSM. the first occassion had nothing to do with marking and both coming in the same session hasn't helped.

This makes me think of my own situation. I've been playing violin now since last September, I did play very briefly at junior school but that was 25 years ago and I could barely read music at the time and didn't even know that the 4th finger was ever used!
I had played other instruments to grade 4 -5 level in the intervening time however.

I have an ambition to teach violin and fiddle in the future.

My teacher says that my first exam should be grade 4 which she said I could take in the first session this year.
After giving it much though however I have decided to wait until the end of this year to do the exam as even though I could probably scrape a pass at grade 4 sooner I would not be able to call myself a grade 4 standard player. I feel I must become much more assured and knowledgable in my technique first and, especially as I want to teach in the future I want to understand the nuts and bolts, they why's and wherefores of violin playing rather than just being able to play a some tunes and scales.

I feel that time taken in concentrated study now can only help later on, and need not delay at all when I go on to take grade 5, 6 etc. I want to explre as much repertoire as possible, especially as I also play folk fiddle.
I feel it is much more important to be the best player I can and to have a real understanding of the instrument rather than just being able to get through an exam and make a fairly decent sound.

Are examiners not allowed to put positive comments on crit sheet? They were I suspect trying to encourage a perhaps not so naturally gifted person. negative comment will only serve to dishearten, discourage and also attract critisism I feel examiners are between a rock and a hard place, damed if they do and damed if they dont.

The post to which were referring was originally posted by Violinia, not by myself. My post was just a comment regarding my own situation regarding being ready (or not) for grade 4 (or any exam).

It's not my thread. I see this being about comments reflecting facts, there could have been a good positive comment made to inspire the pupil. Instead the one that was made could cause issues for the teacher and the pupil themselves and may end up being discouraging. I don't think it's all that difficult to be sensitve about what you write on the comment sheets. The examiners are doing a job which they are paid for they are not doing it out of philanthropy, they are accountable or should be.

On these sort of emotive thread I think it's sometimes easy to loose sight of the candidate and how things effect them.

Yeh sorry about that I had posted before I realised I just took the last comment and replied to the eessence of thread.

This is how I would have read the comment too! Rather than taking it as - 'I advise you to start straight into Grade 5 now'. Something to be borne in mind, too, is that violinia didn't hear the actual exam, which, in essense, might not have been worse than a pupil who would normally play better but didn't do his/her best on the day. He may not necessarily have got the impression that violinia's pupil generally wasn't playing at that level. He only heard the performance of the exam material and didn't know the pupil as she does.

The only comment a pupil of mine ever got with regard to the next grade was "Be sure to work at your sight-reading before going on to Grade 4." Actually I was glad he said it, because it had to come from somebody other than me, as I was being ignored on that unpopular subject, and who better for it to come from than an examiner!

After my aural test I was told I should join a choir...

My friend was asked halfway through her Grade 5 harp exam if she was Welsh by the (Welsh) examiner. She replied that she wasn't, causing him to shout: "You must be! You play the harp, your surname is Jones - you must be!" They argued on the subject for a few minutes before moving onto the sightreading. She failed her exam...Maybe it was a Welsh grudge?

I don't know who to feel sorrier for the examiner who seems to have engaged pen before brain, or violonia and student who are just confused. I'm sure no harm was intended.

I see where you're coming from notmusimum but I also have some sympathy with the examiners. I go back to something I've said before on these forums that the day I went to an ABRSM seminar and we were asked to try being examiners, working in real time on a couple of exams we saw on a video was the hardest thing I ever tried to do. If it's like this day-in, day-out for examiners I simply don't know how they keep going some days, paid or not. I can imagine it's only too easy, the speed in which all this takes place, to write something that isn't quite 100% perfect for everyone out of their best of intentions.

My colleagues who examine tell me they do try to be constructive and helpful but, as others have said here, whatever they write is bound to displease someone. They are accountable - all their mark sheets are read and checked and they are constantly moderated. This seems to me to be the best ABRSM can achieve with people who, after all, are human and not robots (thank goodness).

Some days they may examine 27 candidates in a day, one after the other with little time to think. As a Centre steward, I've seen examiners miss their lunch, stay late, come in early etc, and the constant supply of candidates has seemed to me like being a check-out operator at Christmas, just relentless. How they kept a sense of humour, a smile for each candidate and a kindly word, whilst assessing, writing, playing the piano and adding up the sums and doing their best to keep to time, I've just no idea.

Examiners are not perfect (and I've seen some strange results and more "difficult" examiners in my time) but I have to say, overall, in 38+ years of teaching, the ABRSM has done pretty well by my students and examiner comments have usually been helpful and constructive.

Al, your comments are really interesting and helpful. I guess I was just irritated that a student who is really struggling to make any sort of decent sound at all and really struggles to play in tune, or play with expression or dynamics - should be encouraged to just carry on towards the next grade, as if ploughing (somewhat joylessly in her case) through the grades is the only way forward.

I'd be happy for her to take Grade 5 at some point but not until she's

improved her tone
learnt to play in tune
learnt how to play expressively and with dynamics
learnt how to shift seamlessly
learnt how to play with vibrato

Right now she has so much to work on I think the last thing she needs is to struggle through three more pieces that are bound to be considerably harder than the last three.

For the record I've put her onto some Mary Cohen studies: 'Technique Takes Off' and some folk (the wonderful Drowsy Maggie) so she can start improving her technique and actually have some fun with the instrument. I think ploughing from grade to grade and scraping a pass each time is pretty futile for a bright girl like her who till now has never had enough individual attention in her violin lessons to really progress at the rate she deserves.

She's had one lesson since the exam and had obviously been working hard on Drowsy Maggie because she played it really well and a darn sight better than any of the three grade pieces she must have been feeling so beleaguered with for so long.

In other words, I think it's a really bad idea to spend months and months working on just three pieces - by the time you get to the exam you'll be so utterly bored with them it hardly bears thinking about, but it's what happens if you learn in school and are put in for exams you're not really ready for.

The only comment I've had on a sheet for one of pupils about the next grade was at prep test. He wrote at the end "See you at grade 1!" which I though was nice.

I think this particular comment isn't that bad.


"Full speed ahead towards Grade 5" ... it's slightly ambiguous, as it doesn't actually give a time scale like "next session", or even imply the pupil should rush into things.

There's plenty of room for the teacher to interpret this for the pupil. You could tell the pupil that by telling her to go "full speed ahead", the examiner means she needs to work hard towards grade 5? Playing other material that will prepare her for starting work on grade 5 pieces also counts as working towards that grade - not just the exam pieces themselves.

Not that I'm criticising about this topic, but I feel sometimes people can be a little over sensitive and read too much into comments on sheets. Unless the comment was wholly inappropriate, I'd just take into account the circumstances of the day, and also the fact that the examiner doesn't have time to write poetry - just his/her honest opinion, and they have to be pretty concise about it too.

I did wonder when I first read the opening post if what you really wanted to do was make this point about moving straight from grade to grade and start a discussion on that! Can still be done... I'm letting more and more pupils just move on rather than sit on exam pieces for ages these days - unless the date suits and they're ready at just the right time. But 'move on' doesn't mean buy the next grade book. It means do something constructive to improve technique for the next grade book - unless I feel it's all there already and the next grade book will consolidate that alongside some challenge at the same time. But inheriting a pupil is never easy; usually there's a reason why they needed a new teacher!

From my experience and talking to examiners, they try to avoid anything that might be construed as criticism of the teacher and teaching methods, even if it is obvious. If its obvious to the examiner, it will already be obvious to the teacher, one hopes. Coming from someone who works in schools, its refreshing to see how personal the comments are from examiners. Schools either use report writing software that use a bank of drab and bland comments, or are told to use certain stcok phrases for each achievement boundary.

I had a comment once from an examiner that went along the lines of 'this was a dangerous performance', which I thought was brilliant, and described the pupil so accurately. It was 'on edge' throughout, and he had done it this way for weeks. Some weeks it was brilliant, some weeks it went very wrong. Examiners can only write about what they hear being performed, not what they might have done in the weeks leading up to the exam.

On the subject of the original post, 'moving on to grade 6 or whatever', I would interpet as ready to move on, not necessarily now, but able to cope with the step up. That might also include other non-exam repertoire as well.

I just wanted to make the point that the comment was unnecessary and inappropriate as this was obviously a girl who was barely ready for Grade 4 so why even think about Grade 5?

What the examiner should have said was something like: time to pause and take stock, perhaps, attending to the problems mentioned above before perhaps rushing into the next grade. Wishing you every success etc etc..'

To even mention the next grade when the pupil needed to be considerably better at Grade 4 level first just seemed a bit irresponsible to me, and too geared towards a somewhat pointless 'ploughing through the grades' at what can only be a mediocre level unless the girl gives her playing some serious attention. Does anyone here know any players you can actually call 'good' who just scraped through all their grades 1-5 or beyond? Me neither.

Perhaps I'm quibbling but then again perhaps not!

I honestly would take it as a perfectly innocuous comment - don't read too much into it!

Harrrumph, I still don't see why some of you think it's a harmless remark! I think it's symptomatic of our current national decline into mediocrity.....

Pass a grade - it means you can do something! Shame about the quality but who cares about that?

I see where you're coming from, but before I give a reply of my ideas, I'd like to ask first: What does the simley mean (the "soap" thing)

He's standing on his soap box.

I am sure the examiner cares about the quality which is why your new pupil scraped a pass (i.e. fufilled the minimum requirements to pass Grade 4 level) and did not get a distinction...

No one is disputing the fact that your new pupil needs to work on improving her technique, building her repertoire etc.

There is a widely held view (although not necessarily correct and possibly held only by a minority) that the only grades that actually mean anything are grades 1, 5 and 8. I'm not sure I subscribe to this view, although if I look at my own plans they do involve skipping grades 1-4 on the flute and grades 6 & 7 on the piano! Also, it has to be admitted that grade 5 theory is the only one that matters for higher practical grades and grade 8 practical is the only one that matters for entry to diplomas etc. beyond grade 8. However, I'm not trying to defend the viewpoint here, merely point out that I know the view is held by some people. Since this was a grade 4 exam, perhaps that is what the examiner was referring to, even subconsciously.

In any case, it sounds like an innocuous generally-intended-to-be-encouraging aside rather than anything to get worked up about. The words "storm", " teacup", "mountain" and "molehill" come to mind.

Hmm, probably, but given the high cost of exams, I think that there is an expectation that examiners' comments should be carefully chosen, given the effect that they can have on examinees. The essence of exams is that they should reinforce the pupils' learning, or expose areas of their skills, knowledge and understanding which need developing. So I think that it would be valid for exam comments to set the learning agenda, say, if a candidate's performances were dynamically bland. However, what might seem like a casual remark, such as in the quoted case, can easily hamper a teacher's intended programme. I usually like to do a period of skills consolidation and repertoire exploration after an exam; it's a period in which you can develop the less easily examined skills, and also 'reward' the pupils for the exam-focused work of the preceding weeks.

I have to admit that I am still surprised by the variation in quality of examiners' remarks - some really helpful and constructive (praising where praise is due, but helping guide the candidate where to improve to do 'even better'), but we still get plenty of less-than-helpful examples.

In training sessions (including the AB's own CT programme), I've frequently been reminded that ' the weakest teaching programme is that which just follows the exam syllabus from one grade to the next' (I paraphrase). In that sense, the quoted examiner's comments would seem to be ill-chosen.

I'm sure that there are certain phrases and words that examiners are advised to avoid (e.g. 'a good try'). I hope that suggesting moving onto the next grade would be one of them. Even asides should be carefully chosen.

I'm not so sure about a huge variation of quality in the examiners' remarks. It seems there is more of a variation in the people who read those remarks and their responses to them. The quailty of the remark is decided on by who is reading the mark sheet and how they choose to interpret it.


You might get people who choose not to pay attention to examiners' remarks because they disagree with the advice given. They might feel it has no quality, but another person might decide to act on it and improve whatever aspect of their playing was mentioned.

In training sessions (including the AB's own CT programme), I've frequently been reminded that ' the weakest teaching programme is that which just follows the exam syllabus from one grade to the next' (I paraphrase). In that sense, the quoted examiner's comments would seem to be ill-chosen.

Yes! Anything which might suggest that the next grade is the next thing on the agenda is surely a bad idea.

Perhaps the 'problem' is that the pass mark is too low...?* I would agree with those who've said that the examiner's remark isn't worth getting het up about, but the pass mark is the pass mark and if the pupil achieved that, then that's that! There's bound to be a positive comment at the end of some sort, and encouragement to move on to the next grade is one option!

*(When I say the passmark might be too low, by the way, I don't necessarily mean the actual mark; I mean the standard required to achieve that mark. But that's an argument we've had before; personally I would like to see it a little higher - or at least maybe another bracket in there between a bare pass and one that's almost a merit - because there can be quite a difference in two candidates who will both get a pass. The same could be said of a merit, I suppose.)

Er, I do read examiners remarks rather carefully, and there is a noticeable variation in helpfulness. I work in a school that enters about 150 candidates a year, so there is a fair sample, both in my candidates, and in colleagues'. I certainly do not wish 100% positive feedback ... but there is a range of quality of remarks, right from the ideal (praising where praise is due, but pointing out areas to work on), to (occasionally) unhelpful. Thankfully, the former is usual, but, in the same way we as teachers need to be very careful in our choice of language, so do examiners. And, as with teachers, that is not always 100% the case with examiners.

One of the oddest set of remarks I had recently was from TG (though I'm normally satisfied with the analysis in the TG feedback). The marks were fine ... but the comments were nearly entirely negative, even on my top-marked candidate (achieving Distinction at Grade 7 on trumpet at 11 years old). I had to explain to the candidates not to pay too much attention to the remarks, as they weren't reflected in the marks! But I know that a few of the candidates at that session were still upset by the comments ... the sort of thing that maybe grown-ups can take with a pinch of salt can be taken very differently by children and their parents.

Based on recent experience I would say that the skill required to get to each stage varies between examiners. Rather than add another section (which I can also see might be a valid thing ot do), I think the AB ought to really be concentrating on getting standards uniform. I know it's not easy because of interpretation and the humanity of the examiner. When it becomes clear someone is out of step or something looks iffy they should be dealt with. I think sometimes there's a little bit too much of the it'll be alright on the night attitude Until there are investigations based on evidence there is always going to be debate.

Ducks to avoid attack!! It goes without saying that examiners receive training and on going moderation but they are also in a position where they can choose to use or loose sight of that training. I don't think all of them do this or indeed that it's a choice.

In my opinion you can't on the one hand let independent bodies use your exams as a measure of people's skills when they are only paper moderated and there's no opportunity to spot check.

I think it's rather strange that the pass mark, 100, is actually a mark of 66.6%! Yet in my view 100 is a pretty poor mark for a student who has no special needs. I totally accept that to many people passing an exam is a fantastic thing, but realistically a mark of 100 normally means the playing standard is only just about adequate and nothing whatsoever to write home about. Unless, I suppose, the student scored very high marks on their playing (say 28, 28, 28) which would give you 84, plus very low marks on scales, aural and sight-reading, which I guess is always possible - like 5, 5 and 5! Then you could be a really good player who was a poor sight-reader, didn't know their scales and was hopeless at aural.

Generally speaking though, a scraped pass tends to mean about 20ish for the pieces plus 10-15ish each for the rest. You don't get given 20 marks for a good performance - it means mediocre at best, so why on earth move straight on to the next grade when you're only mediocre at the last?

But I keep repeating myself so I'm going to shut up on this subject. I do think some students set great store by the comments so they should be very carefully chosen. An encouragement to move straight on to Grade 5 when the marks at Grade 4 were only 20, 20 and 20 is not a good idea, end of story!

Well, working towards the next grade would certainly be preferable to working in the opposite direction!

I'm afraid I would agree. I think to pass the student should be able to perform a piece at that level - maybe with the odd mistake or whatever, as nobody's perfect - but a bare pass doesn't always mean that they could.

Well quite!

I don't think the original comment said anything about moving straight onto grade 5, so in my opinion it was a safe enough comment, but that's just how I would react to it - everyone's different.

Regarding the quality issue, well, if a sheet had negative comments on it but the marks were good, I'd tell the pupil that they did very well, and the examiner has given them good advice (rather than negative comments) as to how to improve on some areas. Say something like..."Well you know about all the good things and you have the marks to prove it, so it's better to point out what needs worked on etc..." It's fairly easy to turn something into a positive experience if you and the pupil sit down together and study it.

I think some people are missing something here. 66% to pass is an achievment, and the AB aren't dumbing down. You only need just over half that to pass a Maths GCSE. 100/150 is an achievment worth celebrating.

I'm not saying anything about the actual mark - whether it was 50% or 70% wouldn't matter. I just think that passing should imply 'able to perform pieces at that level'. I'm not really arguing a point; it's just what I think having a grade should mean!

I think examiners have to consider - is this person generally a grade whatever person? If so they pass, whatever that pass mark is.
I know people who mark for brick universities and the OU. You can get a grade 1 pass for exams with 60% in some brick unis, but you have to get 85% with the OU. So the marks are allocated differently.
It's a fact of life that some students are not, and will never be merit or distinction material. I would never belittle a pass, even if bare. It marks improvement from the previous exam and is an important goalpost. If we didn't enter students for each exam until they were capable of getting the higher bands, frankly it might be years between grades, and some would get disillusioned. In singing, sometimes it is not about technique or musicality that stops someone from achieving the higher marks - sometimes it is their inhibitions which prevent them from "performing" and delivering the words convincingly, even though they may sing perfectly well.

I don't agree that a bare pass at, say Grade 4 means the player is necessarily better than they were at Grade 3 when they might have achieved a merit.

I once had a pupil who had done Grade 1 before I started teaching her - she got a strong merit. I put her in for Grade 2 - she got another strong merit. A year later I put her in for Grade 3 - she got yet another strong merit. She was an exam-oriented girl and wanted to go for Grade 4 the following year so we went for that, but by then she was about 13 and had started to get distracted by boys, parties, general social life stuff, and violin started to slip low down her list of priorities. Her mother later told me she was only doing 5 minutes' a day practice that year, if that.

To tell the truth I was reluctant to put her in for Grade 4 that summer because I couldn't honestly see much point, but the girl said she wanted to, and promised to step up her practice, so I gave in.

Anyway Grade 4 came along and she got 112, which for her was a poor mark. Can I honestly say her playing was better than the previous year when she took her Grade 4? Absolutely not, and the mark reflected that. She was playing without verve or any feeling for interpretation, her scales were only just adequate and her sight-reading patchy at best. The previous year her playing was lively and enthusaistic, scales well learnt etc etc. Her merits were all deserved. So just because the Grade 4 pieces were technically harder she was a better musician the previous year and surely that's what it's meant to be about?

For the record I praised her fulsomely for passing the exam but she knew and I knew that she'd run out of steam as far as the violin was concerned.

I suppose she'll always have that certificate and be able to say: 'I got to Grade 4 on the violin' but if she's honest with herself she'll know that the marks that really meant anything were the previous ones. I say this because I know she had it in her to be a really good player if she'd kept up her previous practice regime, but hey-ho.

It comes down to 'What is a musician?' - like the 'What standard do you have to be at...' thread. I'm in danger of repeating myself and being a bore, but I think that being a musician of a particular grade should mean being able to play a piece of that level fairly well. (Let's asume that appropriate aural awareness, etc, is understood, because without a certain amount of that, the person wouldn't play it well, whether or not the mark in the aural section of the exam was good.) I feel that being a musician is about being able to play - musically - first and foremost, with whatever technical skills and aural skills that are required for that being illustrated in the playing. A Formula One racing driver might know lots of theory/car maintenace/be well trained in quick reactions, but we only know if he can drive when he's behind the wheel. Music is a performing art; I'm happy to allow pupils to go onto another grade when I feel they can perform at that level - even if scales, aural (and sometimes even sight-reading, as we see it in exam conditions, as opposed to 'quick learning') are not great.

I don't agree that a bare pass at, say Grade 4 means the player is necessarily better than they were at Grade 3 when they might have achieved a merit.

So I agree with this!

Thanks Dulciana! So this sort of backs up my point that the examiner in question shouldn't have been encouraging the student to move full speed ahead to Grade 5 when she only played the Grade 4 pieces barely adequately! There were also very few suggestions as to how she could improve - just remarks about 'poor intonation' 'muddled sight-reading' etc. And then: OK! Now for Grade 5!

Sigh...

For the record, yes she can do Grade 5 but only when I feel she has a chance of getting a merit at the very least. This will need at least six months of remedial work (and relaxing with some fun pieces) before there's much point even looking at the Grade 5 pieces in my view. By remedial I mean work on tone production, expressive bowing, intonation etc. Otherwise Grade 5 will be just one more step along a very mediocre road...

Yes. sigh.

This thread reminds me of a 12 year old I teach. She apparently passed grade one before coming to me (don't know what sort of marks, but mum said she had taken a long time to get there).

I have taught her for exactly a year now. We've learnt short pieces of around grade 1 and some moving towards 2, but she doesn't play anything really well. I don't really feel she has moved forward - and I suspect that she might be playing less well now than when she took grade one. It would have been interesting to hear her playing at that point. I certainly don't regard her as anywhere near grade 2 yet.

Until 6 weeks ago I can honestly say that despite having passed G2 Piano I wouldn't have said that my youngest was anywhere near that standard. She got a Distinction at G1 and Pass at G2. Her playing skills were probably about the same as they had been when she took the G2 and from then on she went down. In more than 12 months she didn't seem to make any progress at all despite practising. She did take the G2 with hindsight a bit quick after her first exam and she largely learnt the material for herself. That was over a year ago now.

In the last 6 weeks she has been working towards G3 and making rapid progress. She is catching up to where she should be. The transformation has come about due to a new teacher. He's spent time explaining how to practice and basic things about posture and handshape that she's never been taught before. She had looked at the G3 before and each time felt they were too difficult and they looked at other stuff. With the right guidance she has been able to learn for herself, she now thinks the pieces are easy and has skills that she can use to move forward.

I'm not saying in all circumstances a change of teacher will make a rapid improvement in someones playing it just happens to have done so in this case. The good thing is that her new teacher recognises her musicality and has used that to guide her forward. He very quickly was able to bespoke her learning. The good thing is that some of the techniques she has learnt can be transferred to her other instruments which will make her a better player overall.

Violinia and Dulciana parents and pupils can come to realise that taking time to work things out properly will be best long term. I agree with you both that a scraped pass at the next grade doesn't make the person a better player. I am sure Violinia with your guidence the pupil will move forward.