UK Piano Page Piano Forum

Don't ask us, ask the ABRSM!
As I beetle around tuning, I am finding more and more disenchanted teachers who are turning to other boards like the London College, Guildhall and Trinity; with Guildhall, if you take a piano exam you're examined by a pianist, not an oboist or bagpiper or something, so you get a specialist examiner. Some boards don't place such an emphasis on the Grade V theory, and others offer a viva voce aspect to the exam and a more relaxed 'leisureplay' version of the piano syllabus.
Have you asked other teachers who had the same examiner for their kids? We had an examiner round here once who had so many complaints about the erratic marking that I believe a re-examination was offered, so it's worth finding out if his marking was as inconsistent for other candidates.If it was, mobilise the troops.
I always hate to hear about cases like this; it's demoralising for both teacher and pupil. Unfortunately the Board have had something of a monopoly until now, but I think they're beginning to find teachers deserting to other boards...makes you wonder why they sold the posh Bedford Square HQ.
I'd put your head together with some other teachers if you can - it was certainly worth it in the case of the examiner they had here...good luck!

I changed over to LCM about three years ago and have found the examination process much more pleasureable. I must declare an interest because I have taken the role as an LCM rep.
LCM examiners 'engage' with the candidates and the Viva Voce section gives them a chance to talk about the pieces, which makes it more than just getting all the notes right!
I have also found a big difference in the sight reading tests. I had always found that students who are good sight readers were struggling the ABRSM tests. At grade 2/3 they can't attempt the test 'Allegro', so the reading would normally be the notes played correctly but not in the style indicated. LCM's test are less technical and set at slower tempi, they are generally more melodic and the students feel a sense of achievement, which encourages them to sight read.

Paul

This is all very interesting. I can never play the A section well enough in AB exams even though I get nearly full marks for sight-reading. I was also particularly interested in the idea of the examiner engaging with the candidate. My examiner for Grade 3 did that and I got a distinction. He said nice things like, "That was nice. Now can you play this for me?" It made ALL the difference. I have had nothing but passes for the last 3 exams, even though I can play just as well. It was the impersonal examiner persona that truly put me off my stride.

God, yes...I accompanied a girl for Grade V flute whose appointment to have braces fitted had come up the day before the exam. She was a mass of nerves, and a bit tearful, so as I went in I said to the AB examiner "Ermintrude (not her real name - surprisingly...) has had braces fitted yesterday so she's a bit nervous."
"Really." she said. And that was it. No "O never mind, do your best" or anything - miserable moo. I mean, it wouldn't have cost her anything to be a bit approachable, would it?
I'm all for examiners who interact with their victims - I mean, examinees. It makes life so much more pleasant!

Since becoming an LCM rep I have witnessed many exam sessions and accompanied at least 40 exams per session. What has really impressed me is the examiners manner during the exams.
Almost every candidate has really enjoyed the exam and the examiners have gone out of their way to settle candidates nerves.
One instance was a young girl who got herself so wound up before a singing exam, she didn't want to enter the room, so the examiner came out the exam room to greet the child by first name and proceeded to tell her how much she was looking forward to hearing her sing. The child took the exam and was far less nervous on her next exam, handled differently that child may have never taken another exam.
Our students now always feel comfortable to speak to the examiners and do not dread an exam.

Paul

Dynamics Are Perfect, But She Was Marked Down Below The Pass Mark. The Comments For Both Were Identical On The Assessment Sheets. How Can There Be Such A Difference And How Can The Two Have Identical Assessment Sheets?


Capable players can often go badly wrong in exam situations and less talented players can be more consistent. Anyway, do you have copies of these mark sheets? Sorry, but this sounds like @!@! to me anyway. Are you from a rival board? How can you know how they actually did in the exam anyway? Did you listen outside the door? No examiner would give 'identical' comments to a pass student and a fail. Your blatant lie (or exaggeration at the very least) undermines your own credibility far more than that of the associated board. There may be a degree of inconsistency at times, but you're obviously talking :oops: here.


I Have Come Across Children Who Have Passed Abrsm Grading Exams, But Are Unable To Play Properly. I Have Two New Pupils Who Have Passed Grade 3 Who Are Not Able To Do Grade 1 Material And Who Are Not As Good As A Pupil Who Has Yet To Take Grade 1.

Quite possible. I have come across many pupils who have clearly been spoon-fed pieces by old teachers and not taught to think at all. It's very common to find a student who is not taught how to play the piano, but how to scrape together particular pieces. It's perfectly possible to work up to exam standard this way, but rather pointless if the kid can barely read music for themself. That sounds like bad teaching, not bad examining. Exams can be a useful point of aim, but if teachers are short-sighted and treat the exams certificates as the goal rather than the development of the student, that's just poor teaching. Scraping 100 for each exam is not good enough and if a teacher allows a student to do exam after exam this way, then they are the one who is failing.

Andrew

This is an old post and is no longer relevent as the matter was dealt with.

ANDREWC wrote:This is an old post and is no longer relevent as the matter was dealt with.

I think that your potentially slanderous (or is libellous, when referring to unsubstantiated allegations about the professionalism of a major organisation on the internet?) accusations about 'identical' comments on these mysterious mark sheets are as relevant now as when you wrote them.

Andrew