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 son has been serious about music from the age f 4. He is now 10 and still completely dedicated. He wants to carry on throughout high school and eventually make a career for himself through performing and teaching. He already works hard and deserves the credit he gets. He fully deserves to do well n his GCSE and beyond due to amount of work he has already put into this. I don't understand your post, you say your child has no interest yet saying it's unfair, why is it unfair?

You don’t need to be doing music from 5/7. I didn’t start clarinet til 12, piano at 13. Still got A at GCSE, was predicted A at A level but left school. You do need to work hard at your instrument out of school though- it’s just how music is. You need to practice every day to progress. But if you think about it, kids wouldn’t progress in English if they never read books outside school, or be good at art without doing that as a hobby.

Appletree Fair enough - he is indeed a dedicated 'liver and breather' and has been badly advised and badly supported by his school.

I wonder if he could do Arts Award via his drama group? In any case his extra-curricular work should stand him in good stead.

Good luck to him.

YABU.

My DD plays the violin and sings. She has lessons once a week for each, and sings in the school choir and string ensemble so has at least one practice per week (lunchtime) for each of these too. She also practices most days (before school, as she has other hobbies after school). She chose to take up the violin after a demonstration of different instruments to the whole class by the music teacher. She joined the choir without even telling me and started having singing lessons shortly after (which she arranged on her own initiative with the singing teacher and checked with me if it was ok afterwards). I rarely have to remind her to practice and have never forced her to join choir/string group. She choses to do this of her own volition. She is 10. She is enthusiastic and talented, without being a child prodigy, and most importantly she ENJOYS it. Which is why she is happy to put the work in.

I suspect your DD doesn't particularly enjoy music, or she'd be happy to put the work in to do something she really wanted to do.

Children who want to be involved in music (and many other subjects or hobbies) usually find a way. And yes, they all need to practice out of school to improve. As with most things, I would have thought. Or are you one of these parents who believes everything should be done in the school and no effort out in outside of school?

dungeondragon am curious to know which exam board requires Grade 4 before starting.

I wonder if he could do Arts Award via his drama group?

What is this Scrubs? Please tell me more

I have just googled The Arts Award. That is something ds will definitely be interested in. Thanks Scrubs 😊

Why didn't his school mention that! His art teacher was aware of how disappointed he was that he couldn't study both his 'passions' - drama and art 😠

I'm a music teacher in a secondary school and I agree with your DD.

We recruit 25% of the year to Music GCSE because we make it fun at KS3 but it's difficult to convert that enthusiasm into GCSE passes.

That's not to say that we don't try! But enthusiastic late starters can't always make up the 'knowledge gap' even though we do lots of targeted work on the exam. If you've been in orchestras since the age of 9, you'll no doubt have picked up lots of musical vocal and concepts along the way.

I'm a music specialist and have got students through to achieving top GCSE grades and onto a-level (and Uni in one case) with only normal curriculum teaching I.e, no private lessons outside of school/particular parental support. Of course it is 'easier' if you have those extra experiences (like French is easier if you've spent 10years of your life living in France) but if the student wants to achieve then the courses are designed to ensure they can with the right guidance.

dungeondragon am curious to know which exam board requires Grade 4 before starting.

I honestly don't know. That is just what we have been told by the music teacher when considering GCSE options. In could have been grade 3 rather than grade 4 but a certain standard in an instrument or vocals was definitely required. I was told it was due to the new syllabus. It wasn't the case when DD did hers.

Op, you are worrying that your dc would be at a disadvantage doing something she doesn't want to do, because she's never had any interest in it.

My heart bleeds...

Possibly, the music teacher may have meant that is the level you need to perform at for the exam so they were only letting people do the GCSE if they already had it.

dungeondragon am curious to know which exam board requires Grade 4 before starting.

My ds did his practical exam by singing. I know he was required to sing a piece equivalent to, or higher, than ABRSM grade 4 singing exam. I have no idea about practical on instrument tho

My ds did his practical exam by singing. I know he was required to sing a piece equivalent to, or higher, than ABRSM grade 4 singing exam. I have no idea about practical on instrument tho

I think it is the same. In order for the performance to be of a high enough standard i.e. grade 4, the children will have to have private lessons.

Dungeon. Sounds about right

We are the least musical family ever, after a term or two with a recorder and then a borrowed school clarinet my DS (8) begged us for lessons and his own instrument. He practised everyday for a term before I got him one. The enthusiasm is maybe wearing off age ten as I think he struggles with the formality of some of his music lessons, he has three different types now, but it has all been driven by him. I think that if your DC wants to play music they will make this clear to you.

Quite a lot of misinformation on here. I teach Music in a secondary school and enter students for GCSE every year.

Firstly, it used to be possible to take the GCSE performing just what you had done in the classroom. However, lots of kids come to me having done bog all instrumental work at primary school. Singing is fine, and in England/Wales, you only have to perform on one instrument/voice. In the newest specifications, to access the highest marks, in year 11 you need to play/sing pieces of grade 4+ standard. It is possible, if you put in the work outside the classroom to manage this. You don't need to get the highest marks in performing to do ok. You can play Merrily We Go Along with 1 finger on a keyboard and still score marks, but to be honest, if that is all you can do after 2 years, you picked the wrong subject.

If your kids really want to learn an instrument, you have the option of going outside the school. Obviously this costs money and for many it is prohibitively expensive. However, the going rate away from London is currently around £15 - 20 for a half hour individual lesson. It seems to me that the OP was either unaware of this or her DD was not interested. My own first DD asked to learn the cello from the age of 3. I gave in at 4 and she was already learning before starting school. As others have said, as a family, we prioritised music over meals out, cinema trips and flashy holidays. Both DDs and I now earn money performing at weddings, in concerts or busking.

You do not need Grade 5 Theory to access Music GCSE. Some of the Theory is useful but to be honest, they are quite different. The Listening/Appraising component of GCSE requires students to listen to unfamiliar pieces and apply their knowledge of music to answer questions. Examples might be to look at a score and name the key (grade 5 Theory-style) or listen to an extract and name the instrument playing the melody. I do these type of activities with students over KS3 so that when they start the GCSE, they are used to it.

Maybe I am just exhausted from a weekend of playing music with amazing people, but the OP's attitude has annoyed me. I'm glad your DD won't be taking Music; at least the poor teacher is spared one child who cannot be bothered to put in the work, but wants a top grade.

But the whole exam system as a whole is biased towards the people who have a bit of money to spent.
You can have music lessons-or drama classes, coding classes, sports coaching etc.
You can also pay for tutoring.

And even after the exam it's biased towards those with money. As I said to my dd, if she'd been 1 mark off every exam grade boundry we could have afforded the risk of putting every exam back in for remarking.
If we had to count every penny, then we could be in the position of being pretty certain that an exam had been wrongly marked, but not have the £40 or whatever to pay initially-even though they refund if it does alter, you might not have it or be able to risk it.

It is biased towards people with money.

OP, do you really think that children get 9s in maths without doing a lot of maths outside the classroom?

People might have to work hard at maths or other subjects out of classroom but the difference is that the don't have to pay for it. Being require to perform at grade 4 level for a good grade in music does mean that those on lower incomes can't afford it. Having said that at DD's school those on PP only pay £125 a year which isn't that much.

Both of my children did/are doing music at gcse.

My son was never taught, never had lessons on any instrument - yet he taught himself guitar and piano because he was interested in it. he was also very into the music technology side. He does not know how to read music. He failed his music gcse

he is now doing music tech at university and achieved an A grade at college for his music tech course. he also works as a producer and session musician as he can play almost anything.

My daughter has played an instrument since she was 8 and has achieved grade 7. She is predicted a 9 at GCSE for music and she finds it easy.

I agree that GCSE is easier for children who have been taught - however as my son proves, music has many different forms and not all talent can be taught or tested.

At GCSE a child should do what they are interested in - but if your child has never shown an interest in learning an instrument or hasn't been self taught (guitar being the obvious cheaper option) then I wonder why they would be considering music at all. Although singing is always a good option .

BTW - I am a single parent and have utilised all of the free and cheap lessons and music instrument hire to ensure my daughter could learn her instrument. I could never have afforded private lessons - ever.

This isn't about privileged children over poor kids. This is about talent.

Hrm. I think a lot of the problem comes down to funding and curricular prioritisation. I agree with the OP that to do well at music, students generally require outside input. However maybe if there were properly subdidised instrumental lessons and instruments this would happen. Maybe also there wouldn't be the need to supplement learning if music was given more teaching time.

Playing an instrument requires time and dedication, as well as the correct equipment. Few schools offer that.

I think it's a shame that music is so disregarded in this way, because there are loads of benefits, both broad and particular, to being helped to explore music in a structured way.