To think music exams in schools are unfair?

[FleurDelacoeur]

Discussion over dinner last night about which subjects DD might consider taking to exam level. Her first comment was "well, I'm definitely dropping Music". We asked why. She said it's because that to do well in music exams at school you need to be doing music out of school too, which she's not. All the kids doing well at school music are the ones who have been doing violin since 7, or piano since 5. We are not a musical family, DD (or the other kids) haven't really expressed an interest in music, and she wasn't selected to learn an instrument at Primary - not open to all, they were "tested" and unsurprisingly the ones who were already playing piano or something did better than total novices.

DD feels it's unfair as it's the only school subject where you need to be doing it outside school to excel. Even similar subjects like drama or art - it's possible to never pick up a pencil or a script before arriving at senior school and still do well enough to pass exams and pass them well.

But if you've never been taught to read music or play an instrument there is no way you're going to get to the exam standard in a few years just working in school. I am assuming secondary schools don't have flutes, violins and pianos to lend to students who are interested in music but haven't the equipment at home or funds to buy one.

I know at Nat 5 level in Scotland there's more about styles of music, listening and identifying instruments and that sort of thing which is accessible to all. But progress to Higher standard and it's all about performance and composition. Also I would imagine that there are a lot of people taking Higher Music as one of their 5 Highers who are not going into music as a career.

Not sure how you resolve this but it just seems intrinsically unfair.

My DD can’t drive. She’s never shown an interest or had lessons like other kids in the 6th form and I think it’s awful that she’d fail her driving test if she put in for it. They’ve deliberately made the test easier to pass for people who have had driving lessons!

Actually, this thread has just reminded me of my friend complaining about the primary school orchestra at the school our DCs were at and how it excluded children who didn't play instruments.

It also included recorder players, and all DC in school got free class recorder lessons so it was open to anyone.

I'm a professional musican. At GCSE age I was practising my instruments 3 hours per day and I still didn't get an A* due to not being taught well/not understanding the written/academic part of it. Aced the practical part though! Still went on to do A level and then to music college. I recognise that I was very lucky to have the opportunity to work on it at that level from a young age. Now I am an adult and work the majority of my time in accessible music making I do see a bit too much of a good vs bad at music in schools and education in general. I think it is very sad that because people often get a low quality musical education at primary level they then decide they can't do it. A more equalising system is the In Harmony system (based on the El Sistema system in Venezuela) which immerses an entire primary school in music and bases the whole day around it. The effects on general academics and social life in the schools have been incredible.

My oldest daughter took music as a subject and she didn’t play any musical instruments outside of school. At her school you chose music performance or music tech, she did music tech. For her exams she sang, as the voice is an instrument and played keyboard and did sound engineering.

Music GCSE is for musical people.
They shouldn't have to dumb it down - making it less respected - just so that children who aren't musical can do it.

But that is exactly what has happened in science and maths.

Your argument is just odd.
You seem to be complaining that your dd doesn't want to do a subject that she showed no interest in

You are wrong about other subjects too.
I (oddly enough) was talking to someone yesterday who sailed through her cookery exams because of what she'd been taught at home by her Mum, long before secondary. My dd's football team has had parents trying to vide their dds for the last 2 years to provide the evidence for their GCSE exams - couldn't do that in school. People who sail through MFLs usually have either a parent who is a native speaker, or parents who are fluent, or have spent a long time in one of those countries. Then some dc are born into families who read to them, and have a quiet space to work, and a warm home, and parents who support them, and others aren't.
Newsflash - not everyone has the same experiences in life, and some of those experiences will give them an advantage in some exams.
The odd thing about this is that you say you could have taken her for lessons, but didn't....... so not sure how her 'not playing an instrument' is anyone's fault but yours?

I agree and I'm a secondary music teacher! The course is not designed to build on Ks3 and you need grade 4 standard to do well in performing.
No school has enough allocation at ks3 to get most children up to scratch without external input.

This is why we have tiny numbers opting for GCSE and then get criticised for this by headteachers who use art as a comparison....

I have two dc who have not played instruments beyond a couple of years at primary.

One achieved A* in Music at GCSE and is taking it at A-level. They did the Technology module rather than the Performance module.

The other is currently predicted 7/8 in Music GCSE, and will be singing for the Performance module. We have supplemented their school preparations with singing lessons.

This is an interesting thread. It's a bit off topic but I remember people taking Music GCSE having to play three instruments - a friend who already played violin and clarinet took up piano to do it. However, this was 26 years ago so might have changed quite a bit.

It does mean that only those who have the means and desire to learn to play instruments / compose music will be able to do Music GCSE. However, I can't really see the point of Music GCSE without some aspect of composing and performing.

It may be that those who really are talented musicians will be more interested in their ABRSM grades. Someone with Grade 8 will still be an accomplished musician, regardless of whether they have Music GCSE.

But Tom don't schools have choirs where students can join extra curricular music throughout ks3?

The idea that music is unfair because ks4 is big jump from ks3 is the same as music and drama.
To do GCSE PE or Drama requires more than attending lessons in y7-9.

I teach English, students who read widely, enter writing competitions, run their own blogs, attend book clubs etc have an advantage.

she wasn't selected to learn an instrument at Primary - not open to all, they were "tested" and unsurprisingly the ones who were already playing piano or something did better than total novices.

My younger daughter does play an instrument and she started in primary. The children were all offered the chance to learn an instrument, if you wanted to learn one you put your name down then you were ‘tested’ over a few weeks to see how you got on. Lots of kids in her class tried out but only a few got in. My daughter played no other instruments and neither did the other kids who got in.

Ooh, do you know what's even more unfair? If you have Trinity or ABRSM grade 6 or above it actually counts as a GCSE in the performance tables without you needing to sit a GCSE exam.
You know, in recognition of the fact that it actually takes hours and hours of lessons and practice to get to that level.
Grade 7 and 8 count in KS5 performance tables and UCAS points too.

But you do have to extend your other subjects to home to do well....isn't that the whole point of homework? You do it outside of school to see if you can grasp it in a different environment. Same with music. To excel in maths you do need to practice at home (usually) and spend additional time, especially if you want to be top of the class or ahead. Same principle applies to music.
Some people are naturally talented at music and pick it up very easily, others don't.

This is what I was about to say. In my hometown, there were a handful of language entries outside French/ German, entirely down to kids of ethnic background X doing language X, presumably as a means of bumping up their gcse score (even the ones who generally got Es/FsGs could generally manage a top grade here). Forget “greater opportunities to study” - these kids didn’t have to do any studying or active learning. Surely that’s massively unfair?

Schools are generally happy to enter students for GCSEs in their mother tongue language as they can include the results in the school EBacc performance.

Grade 7 and 8 count in KS5 performance tables and UCAS points too. It's important to recognise that universities do not include these points in the offers they make to students applying through Ucas, however.

I am a peri music teacher. At one of my schools they offer the GCSE music students free individual music lessons, but this is quite unusual. There is always a performance element, and students are expected to be around grade 5 standard. I don't know how that is possible if you don't learn something outside school.
When I did O'level music there was no practical part of the exam at all!

Well she said she wanted to drop out because she wasn't doing it outside of school, not asking to learn something outside of school, presumably the interest isn't really there, otherwise she would be asking to do more? Have you asked her if she wants to learn something? Most music shops do try out days so people can look at lots of different instruments.

Cru

I don't think grade 8 is accomplished, it's considered as just starting when looking at a career in music.
That's like saying A level law makes you an accomplished Barrister or Lawyer, it's miles away.

I agree that it may look like Music at Ks4 is unfair, and depending on the school it might well be.
It's ok to say that schools have choirs and orchestras, but no state schools in our area do.
Very few opt for music because they haven't been given the same opportunities as others, however, it is possible to do well without playing outside school, apart from the obvious practice that's required.
I think most LA's and local music shops hire instruments for short/long term.
I also disagree that all other subjects are completed in school.
My dd has opted for Art and she has been made well aware that she will have to do about 5 hours additional work outside the classroom.
We are expected to buy supplies that she will need whilst working at home.
Drama is similar, lots of rehearsals and work outside school.
It isn't overlooked as an option just because a child may not have visited the theatre before.

Which ever way you look at it, Music is not an easy option. Beyond GCSE it gets even tougher. My daughter took Maths, Physics, French and Music at AS Level and Music was the toughest, as far as she was concerned. Despite having a Grade 8 distinction in her instrument, Music was the subject she did not continue with to A2.

I did dance gcse. I danced outside of school. You did need that education and understanding of dance to do it.
My school didn't offer it so I did it privately (bless my parents!)

My ds is a good swimmer. Far better swimmer than I was dancer. Yet he can't access gcse PE because of team sports and physical disability. I think (iirc) you need to be doing sport outside of school or play for a school team to be able to take it. But you also need to be good at the subject as a whole!

Both ds and I have been taught art throughout school - neither of us can draw anything remotely expressing an ounce of talent 😂😂

He's taking drama (technical theatre part) but doesn't belong to drama clubs outside of school apart from schools tech team.

I can't explain brilliantly but this thread is odd! Surely the point of options at gcse is that students pick what they enjoy/are good at? I appreciate that music does need extra outside but, as pointed out above, so do a number of subjects. I teach science and the students that do best are putting in the time at home. People have different interests that's WHY we have options and not a blanket one-fits-all approach (massive changes needed still to education but...) , you've already said she's not interested in music, that's the point of having the choice? There'll be other subjects that she enjoys more?

An odd OP. If your DD 's not even doing music, why do you even care?

Re the tests at school to select those who will learn an instrument, I took this test at school and was selected to play the violin despite never having had a music lesson in my life to that point. They are aural and rhythm tests designed to test musicality which is innate. Not everyone is musical. That's life.

it's possible to never pick up a pencil or a script before arriving at senior school and still do well enough to pass exams and pass them well.

It's also possible to never have picked up a musical instrument before senior school and still do well and pass GCSE. If a child is interested, they'll be motivated, surely.
Your dc aren't interested in music and will choose something else.
One of mine dropped all humanities at the end of Y8, as didn't want to progress.

Most, if not all, subjects need some level of doing outside of school. That's homework. If you particularly enjoy a subject then you do more than the standard homework and study/practice in your free time too. That's how you excel. I enjoyed art at school so practiced a lot at home in my spare time and studied artists as I got older. Your DD has never expressed a desire to do music so I'm not really sure what the argument is? If she wanted to learn an instrument and you couldn't let her for whatever reason then I'd see your point a little. All children should have the same opportunities at school, that's why there's generally schemes in place for more disadvantaged families. The best thing about exams is that you get to pick what subjects you're best at and ones you enjoy most. Your DD isn't interested in music do surely there's no issue?

The thing that strikes me is that doing music at home is seen as an unfair advantage - those children will be able to read music etc without loads of extra work at GCSE time.
What the OP did not seem to grasp is that they weren't subliminally absorbing it before that. They were working at it. Yes, they had the chance (eg parents ho can afford it) which maybe makes it unfair, but they also had to put in the hours. When other kids were watching TV, or playing with mates, these kids were inside at a piano or with a recorder, making their parents lives hell with thumped out, wrong versions of Jingle Bells or screeched out Twinkle Twinkle. (I was that child, I am now that parent! I wanted to learn but it didn't mean I wanted to practice! My DD has a similar view!)
It's the same amount of work, if not more, because they've probably been doing it for years. GCSE music isn't easier because they have to do less work, it's just that the work came earlier in their lives.
Incidentally, my parents aren't musical. I didn't grow up with an unfair advantage in a musical home. I wanted to learn. I pestered for ages before they gave in and I had lessons through school.
By GCSE I was practicing for an hour a day. So getting an A in music was easy, but not because I didn't have to put the time in, I just didn't have to learn to read music at that point.
I'm multi tasking (cooking dinner while fending off 'starving' children while trying to write this so I apologise if it isn't coherent).