Could anyone tell me why a pass in G6 sight reading is essential for passing the whole ABRSM teaching diploma? It seems odd to me when there are so many other musical skills, such as those tested in the practical musicianship exams, which would also seem important for teachers.

I'd have thought it would look quite ridiculous if, as a teacher, you couldn't sit there and play at sight pretty much anything a student puts in front of you.

Pupil: "I want to learn this, but don't know how this bit goes, can you show me?"
Teacher: "Ummm....I'm not a great sight reader..."

Teacher then stumbles through the piece Les Dawson style...

Pupil: "Riiiight..."

I find the way you put things so hilarious at times, Sol! Certainly made me realise why grade 6 sightreading is important!

I wasn't even trying to be funny, I was deadly serious...

Oh well, glad it gave you a laugh!

Yes, a Les Dawson approach would be embarrassing.

I take it, then, that you would argue that, as as long as a music teacher can sightread anything put in front of him, it isn't as important that he should be able to give useful guidance on the interpretation of a piece, or to teach improvisation to a jazz pupil, or to transpose an accompaniment for a singer, or for a choir director to hold a tune when singing in parts?

If it's set as part of the diploma then I'm guessing it's not just students who think that being able to sight read at grade 6 is asking too much of a teacher.

No, I wouldn't argue that. But what I think would be the case is that the majority of issues you mention - interpretation, improvisation, transposition - can be examined and demonstrated in the course of the viva which constitutes the major part of the exam, whereas the quick study (which isn't sight-reading by the way, have a look at some of the threads on the subject to see the difference) can only really be examined by doing it.

As far as a choir director holding a tune goes, I don't see why that should be a particular issue in the teaching diploma, but if you feel it is something you want to point out, do so in the viva.

I implied no such thing.

All those skills you mention above are extremely useful. Some, like Jazz Improvisation may, or may not be as important, depending on what your focus is and what your pupils want to learn. I see that many teachers when advertising will mention these kind of specialities to set them apart from others.

If you set out to be a very niche "Jazz Improvisation" teacher, then fair enough, sight-reading may not be important in that context, but I'm not sure you'd have an easy time building up a decent amount of pupils.

I honestly see no logical argument against having sight reading in the "must-have" category for a teacher going for an ABRSM diploma.

Thank you for these replies.

Solari - I wasn't thinking that the 'quick study' should necessarily be removed from the essential category, but I was querying the emphasis which I thought was given to it, as against other things.

Katyjay - you have met this last point, thank you. I will read the small print more carefully. As for choir directing, it does seem to me in many circumstances to entail a certain amount of teaching, for instance if you're running a church choir. I'm not intending to do the diploma, by the way, but if I ever do, I'll be sure to mention the choir!

It is not just arequirement for the teaching diploma. Sight reading (or quick study) is also a requirement for the performance diploma.

Fair enough

Hmm, what if the piece put in front of you is more than grade 6 level?

Also, a pass in Grade 6 is not necessarily a PERFECT rendition of the piece - it may include some Les Dawson moments!

I think in the case of something above grade 6, it'd be asking a bit much to expect a teacher to be able to play it perfectly from sight I should have worded that better I guess (not "pretty much anything")!

Most of the playing by sight a teacher will do will be focusing on and demonstrating particular bars where the student is having trouble, I'd have thought? At least that's how it works in my lessons.

Our piano teacher demonstrating at sight usually has some Les Dawson moments. The pieces are often above grade 6 though and he does them at performance type speeds and conveys the feel of the piece.The mishaps are often down to him having forgotton to put his specs on before starting!

I wish I could play like Les Dawson.

Most of the demonstrating is to help the girls decide what they would like to learn next. (He often has to play quite a few tunes before they make a decision )

Ah, my mistake! I thought you meant playing through a WHOLE piece at performance standard!

hee hee

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nNGlaiVypU

There was quite a bit of discussion about him a while ago, I can't remember which thread it was in, though. I think you have to be something special to play music wrong like that and still make it sound good!

sight-reading in teacher i get, but, why a quick study in performance? why would you need to sight read a peice for performing?

You wouldn't but performing is not necessarily the only thing a musician does.
What about orchestra/band rehearsals and the like?
Also is it unreasonable to expect that a performer of a certain standard was able to read music to a certain standard too? (that's a question rather than a fixed opinion)

Personally I think the 'quick study' concept, as opposed to ordinary exam sight reading, should start being a part of exams at about Grade 6. Many of us can make an infinitely better job of something second time through, once we've latched onto the style as oppose to just the notes. Or even after fiddling with a few bits of it! But then again, some people can't; second, third, fourth time round, it might just still be notes. The quick study is a test of musicality as well as quick thinking. Both are fairly important in a teacher!

For a teacher taking a piano one it probably becomes even more essential: last minute accompanying, practice accompaniments.
Orchestral/vocal instruments: last minute fillers to bolster a section or replace an ill on the day pupil in a solo passage.
Alternatively go and look at the thread in the organ group about people receiving no notice as to what the hymns might be.
Last Christmas I arrived at a Messiah from scratch to find the bass soloist was off ill, all right I have busked through the bass solos at home before, but I had last performed one in public ten years ago.

Good point! A diploma of any kind implies that at a pinch you might just be able to manage....

I don't have a problem with the concept of the quick study at all . . but the guidelines for Dip ABRSM say that it will be of about Grade 6 standard. My son (sight reading is his strong point) says what they gave him was way beyond Grade 6. Not sour grapes as he got a Distiction in the Diploma exam. Don't have a problem with how hard the sight reading was but really feel the guidelines are misleading.

My experience has been variable (flute). My first Dip (Performance) the standard was quite hard (more than Grade 6) and I was relieved to get 9 for it. My second Dip (Teaching) was much easier: a minuet in G major with a section in G minor, but this time I was disappointed to get 9 for it! My LRSM (Performance), supposedly Grade 7, was the easiest of the lot (similar to a current Grade 5 piece), although fast. I got 10 for that one! So I think it just depends on what you are given, and the difficulty is variable (as indeed the difficulty across different pieces set for the same grade exam tends to vary).

The main job is to go for a musical performance. The odd wrong note doesn't matter if the musical intention of the piece is conveyed.

I do think it would be nice if there were other Diploma options that didn't focus at such a high level. For example, if you want to work for the primary music service up here you only take students who began their learning at school and they don't start until they are 10, so you are only teaching them for 2 years. But to qualify to do that you have to go into all this grade 6 malarkey rather than concentrate and specialise in teaching beginners. The CTABRSM exists, but it's a cart before the horse because you have to have IIRC 5 pupils to do it and it also costs a whole heck of a lot more than the Dip! So whilst I have to suck it up and take the grade 6 theory and revise every level of examination material and purchase a whole heap of books to make up the "selected material" up to grade 6 that has to be from the current syllabus, not just the 7 box files of music I already own, it would be much more appropriate for me to do 80% of my examination on how to set a beginner up with their instrument and take them up to about grade 1 or 2. It's not that I can't play well, or that I don't think you need to be able to play well to teach beginners, just that the skills are different, and I have to learn two totally separate things, one for the exam and one for actually teaching!

So I guess a whole lot depends on what and how you want to teach as to how fundamental each part of the exercise is to you personally. I am actually very strong on sight-reading but I often fall apart doing it in my exams, even though I never have in orchestra and ensemble. I messed up an extremely simple 3/4 part in my conservatoire audition. I had just been out on a fire evacuation that totally ruined my train of thought, but they must have been laughing their socks off that this student "couldn't sight-read at all".

yes, i also heard that the level of the peices in the quick study is ridulously high from some of my friends. and they could sight a grade8 level peice comfortably usually. im worried about the quick study the most out of the whole exam, as it seems to be so random. you could get an easy waltz where all you have to do is keep the 3/4 beat going, or you could get something eye-poping hard. does anyone know how the examiners choose the peices to give to us to sight-read? if you played marvellously in your peices, will they choose something hard to push your grades down/think you are GREAT at piano, so you must be good at sightreading (lets not offer simple songs for her to sightread)?

I've only just come in on this discussion but I wanted to say that I cannot imagine not being able to sight read. I use it every day of my life, accompanying, demonstrating pieces, technical points, duet playing, chamber music, 2nd piano in concertos, not to mention investigating new pieces etc. It seems perfectly reasonable that a certain level of it should be a requirement of any diploma whether teaching or playing.

For DipABRSM pieces are composed specially for that session. They are modern and I think everyone is given the same for a particular session, but I'm not sure. It helps to have a lot of practice with modern pieces - I believe ABRSM recommend that you try grade 6 or 7 Spectrum pieces as preparation.

I can't comment on the piano ones, but my son did DipABRSM clarinet in July 2008 and found the quick study piece about the level he expected.