Before and after: what to listen for in assessing our students.

This session focused on assessment and evaluation of musical performances. Using excerpts drawn from student performances recorded in Los Angeles, Dallas, New York, Vancouver, Edmonton and Toronto, the team of clinicians shared their insights into specific elements that are considered by professional evaluators. The presentation was enhanced through unique and innovative use of technology: excerpts were played back on a Yamaha Disklavier synchronized with video, providing an opportunity for the audience to observe first hand how this technology can serve as a highly effective pedagogical tool.

In her opening remarks, Janet Lopinski acknowledged the outstanding support of Yamaha Corporation of America and Yamaha Canada Music Limited, pointing out that they not only generously sponsored this day, but also provided constant encouragement, expertise and creative ideas in shaping the presentation.

Lopinski also thanked the teachers who had recommended and prepared students to participate in recording sessions during the winter and spring of 2006. She expressed appreciation for the fact that in order to ensure a wide range of performances, teachers sent not only their prize pupils with polished repertoire, but students at all stages of development.

Student performers for the recording sessions were provided by the following teachers:

Los Angeles

Trudy Anshutz

Susan Boettger

Laura Dickey

Ann Green

Cecilia Gross

Polly Schaffner

Teri Watson

Susan Wong

Dallas

Becky Corley

Mary Humm

Matthew Kline

Catharine Lysinger

Jenni Martin

New York

Saar Ahuvia

Fiona Christand

Ingrid Clarfield

Scott Donald 

Amy Glennon

Tracy Grandy

Johanna Kosak

Takako Kuniyuki

Chiu-Tze Lin

Margie Nelson

Betty Stoloff

Yuet Wah Lai

Judy Woo

Vancouver

Aline Banno

Darlene Brigidear

Marilyn Glazer

Ronald Morgan

Murray Nichol

Ildiko Skeldon-Huber

Donna Symons

Lay Tuan Tan

Edmonton

Mitchell Cox

Elaine Dunbar

Pat Frehlich

Eleanor Kerr-Young

Miriam Mahood

Shelagh Scott

Toronto

Araxie Altounian

Ada Chen

Laura Copfer

Marina Geringas

Vanessa Hsu

Grace Lin

Donna Mak

Lynda Metelsky

Sandra Mogensen

Marietta Orlov

Carolynne Pagett

Ella Poret

Karen Quinton

Frances Saxby

Judianne Schoen

Virginia Taylor

Tanya Tkachenko

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Disklavier Recording Sessions took place at the following locations:

* Yamaha Corporation of America, Buena Park 

* Meadows School of the Arts, SMU, Dallas

* Yamaha Artist Services, New York

* Tom Lee Music, Vancouver

* Giovanni Music, West Edmonton Mall, Edmonton

* Japanese Canadian Cultural Centre, Toronto

Finally, the contributions of members of the College of Examiners who served as reviewers were acknowledged. As a result of their involvement, the comments made in the presentation represent not only the opinions of the five clinicians, but reflect the responses of leading pedagogues and adjudicators from both Canada and the United States. The review teams consisted of the following individuals:

* Amy Immerman, Sheila Vail (Cincinnati)

* Deborah H. How, Jennifer Snow (Los Angeles)

* Elaine Capper, Maria Case, Janet Fothergill, Christopher Kowal, Lynda Metelsky, Jenny Regehr (Toronto)

* Aline Banno, Ildiko Skeldon-Huber (Vancouver)

Part One: "Before"

To frame the detailed discussion of assessment, the session began with a live student performance of Muzio Clementi's Sonatina in F Major, Op. 36 No. 4. Teachers were invited to write comments in the workbook provided, and to assign a mark. The following guidelines were provided:

Marking Categories

* Not Ready to Assess--Below 60 percent (Fail)

* Fair--60-69 percent (Pass)

* Good--70-79 percent (Honours)

* Very Good--80-89 percent First Class Honours)

* Outstanding--90-100 percent (First Class Honours with Distinction)

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Everyone's marks were collected and tabulated, resulting in a range of marks from 55 percent to 93 percent, with an average mark of 75 percent. This range was not surprising in view of the fact that the audience represented a diverse group from different geographic regions, with different training, experience and expectations.

A brief discussion of the performance followed, led by Peteris Zarins, chief examiner for RCM Examinations. The clinicians offered their thoughts in response to what they had heard. All were in agreement in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the playing: there was good energy, and a stable tempo, though several hesitations and insecure moments resulted in loss of momentum. The consensus was that additional musical contrast and rhythmic vitality would enhance the performance.

Part Two: Elements of Assessment

The next segment of the presentation offered a systematic break-down of specific elements that factor into the assessment of a performance, moving from the general to specific.

Overall impression

Even without formal training in assessment techniques, it is relatively easy to place a performance into one of the following categories:

1. Not ready to assess

2. Fair

3. Good

4. Very Good

5. Outstanding

A brief excerpt of student playing was shown to illustrate each category, with comments calling attention to strengths and weaknesses of each performance.

Basic Preparation

Next, excerpts were shown to demonstrate how the fundamental issues of note accuracy, rhythmic precision, pulse awareness, tempo control and reliable memory are essential ingredients in creating a successful performance. In each case, carefully chosen clips demonstrated how the presence or absence of these qualities would factor in to the assessment. A series of performances illustrating different types of memory slips was presented, with the clinicians offering their reactions to how the errors affected the performance. In one case, a brilliant, sparkling performance of Sonatina in C, Op. 55 No. 1 (Kuhlau) was interrupted by a small memory slip, but the student was unable to recover even after numerous attempts, indicating the absence of awareness of the harmonic structure and analytic thinking. The tendency for memory slips to occur in the left hand was also noted, as was the frequency of slips in the final moments of a performance.

Tone Quality and Dynamics

The next segment, led by Scott McBride Smith, moved beyond basics to musical qualities related to style and interpretation, including beauty of tone, variety of sound and color, balance and clarity. A comparison of two performances of the same piece, "Distant Memories" by Canadian composer Alexina Louie, provided the opportunity to hear how one student was able to produce gorgeous tone following the indications in the score and creating a beautiful atmosphere, while another had little tonal variety resulting in a considerably less inspired performance. This section concluded with an astounding example of an eight-year-old pianist playing the Chopin Nocturne in E Minor, provoking astonished gasps and spontaneous applause from the audience.

Articulation

The importance of variety in touch, especially in baroque repertoire was demonstrated through a series of performances of the Menuet in G Major from the Notebook for Anna Magdalena. Everyone in the audience noted the difference between performances in which there was a lack of consistency in the approach, and those where the articulation was carefully planned and skillfully executed. One lovely performance incorporated exquisite ornamentation on the repeats, showing an admirable sense of stylistic awareness.

Rhythmic Character

Through a comparison of several performances of "The Wild Horseman," Midori Koga highlighted how rhythmic vitality and awareness of metric accentuation are essential factors in projecting the musical character. The "Milonga del Angel" was used to demonstrate the importance of rhythmic flexibility in certain styles of music, and how the under-use or overuse of rubato can hinder a performance. There was strong reaction to the final performance, in which the student's personal style, somewhat eccentric and "over the top," showed how excessive rubato can result in rhythmic distortion.

Phrasing and Structural Awareness

Comparing musical phrases to sentences in speech, the clinicians demonstrated how a lack of direction in phrasing results in playing that is stagnant and unfocused. An excerpt in which a student played with beautiful tone, but lacked shape and direction illustrated this point. A series of performances of the opening section of Fantasia in D Minor by Mozart was used to illustrate how awareness of harmonic progression and the concept of tension and release in music can enhance and enliven a performance.

Stylistic Awareness

The importance of stylistic awareness in interpreting music at intermediate and early-advanced levels was discussed, with examples from each era demonstrating how students were able to capture this and as a result enhance their performances. Stylistic considerations included the following:

* Baroque

* Articulation--variety of touch

* Contrapuntal texture--control of voicing, part playing, independence of hands

* Genre-specific character--"affect"

* Characteristic sound

* Ornamentation

* Other elements

* Classical

* Clarity of texture, balance

* Structural awareness

* Rhythmic discipline

* Dynamic contrast

* Variety of touch

* Other elements

* Romantic

* Personal expression, imagination

* Rubato, flexibility

* Use of pedal

* Phrasing, sensitivity to harmonic progression

* Descriptive programmatic elements

* Tone color, voicing

* Other elements

* Contemporary

* Fidelity to the score

* Rhythmic variety and complexity

* Sound exploration, tonal variety, color

* Discovering, projecting and communicating within new musical language

* Other elements

Imagination and Artistry

Several outstanding performances in which there was evidence of intense involvement and a strong personal connection to the music were presented, again creating a sense of excitement from the enthusiastic audience. In one particular case, a young man who had been shown earlier performing a Kabalevsky Etude somewhat perfunctorily, was shown performing John Lennon's "Imagine" with compelling musical energy and personal commitment. Reflections on our role as teachers in nurturing artistry and creativity in our students concluded this segment.

Overall Impression

Having explored specific elements that are factors of assessment, the presentation returned to the original examples that had been used to demonstrate the general categories: Not ready to assess, Fair, Good, Very Good and Outstanding. Brief excerpts were replayed to refresh the audience's memory. Now, in addition to the categories, marks were assigned to reflect how these performances would be graded according to RCME standards. Many participants commented afterwards that this was an especially useful exercise, and that as a result of the discussion of specific elements, their assessment was now more methodical.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Part Three: "After"

In the final segment of this session, the opening Sonatina performance was played back, having been recorded on video and Disklavier during its original performance. Having considered the elements that enter into a professional assessment during Part One, the general feeling was that the insights gained through the analysis and discussion that had transpired in Part Two had in many cases transformed the perception. Furthermore, the average mark (75 percent) from the audience's original assesment was acknowledged to be fitting and appropriate.

To conclude the session, a concise explanation of the technology was given by George Litterst. Attendees were invited to remain for follow-up discussion during the lunch break.

Midori Koga, George Litterst, Janet Lopinski, Scott McBride Smith and Peteris Zarins, presenters