Music Exam marking fiasco

raddy59

I have been taking a music diploma course externally with the aim of eventually teaching music.

I took a practical diploma exam which I failed (just)

I contacted the exam department with my point that parts of the syllabus hadn't been marked in the exam. This is obvious from the Examiners Report.

They replied after a month (s/be 10 days) and didn't answer my initial query but instead raised a new point about the performance which is just plain wrong - and can be shown to be wrong as what they are saying bears no relationship to the program I performed

I took the complaint higher to the head of exams, but after 2 weeks I have received no reply.

I have resent my letter to the head of exams. In the meantime I have applied for a v. expensive resit - but I need to get to the bottom of this as
1. I am resitting an exam (which I probably passed) with an at best incomplete report of why I failed so there may be things they found wrong haven't been reported , and
2. I have since discovered other students who have had similar problems with this organisation.
3. It has cost me a lot of money I don't really have

I think they are making no serious attempt to sort this out and are "playing for time"
How can I get them to address this - its dragging on and on
So advice - what can i do next - if anything, or do I just have to pay up, put up and shut up?

jobbingmusician

raddy59 wrote: »

I have been taking a music diploma course externally with the aim of eventually teaching music.

I took a practical diploma exam which I failed (just)

I contacted the exam department with my point that parts of the syllabus hadn't been marked in the exam. This is obvious from the Examiners Report.

They replied after a month (s/be 10 days) and didn't answer my initial query but instead raised a new point about the performance which is just plain wrong - and can be shown to be wrong as what they are saying bears no relationship to the program I performed

I took the complaint higher to the head of exams, but after 2 weeks I have received no reply.

I have resent my letter to the head of exams. In the meantime I have applied for a v. expensive resit - but I need to get to the bottom of this as
1. I am resitting an exam (which I probably passed) with an at best incomplete report of why I failed so any points they found wrong haven't been reported , and
2. I have since discovered other students who have had similar problems with this organisation.
3. It has cost me a lot of money I don't really have

I think they are making no serious attempt to sort this out and are "playing for time"
So advice - what can i do next - if anything, or do I just have to pay up, put up and shut up?

I find this interesting, but don't understand your post (probably me).

raddy59 wrote: »

I contacted the exam department with my point that parts of the syllabus hadn't been marked in the exam. This is obvious from the Examiners Report.

What does this mean? It could mean the following (and possibly other things)

1. The exam tested all areas of the syllabus, but some of the questions weren't marked. (how would you know?)

2. All areas of the syllabus were tested, but some of the questions had no feedback on whatever report was sent to you.

3. The exam failed to test some areas of the syllabus, (Common, and I don't see a problem with this)

raddy59 wrote: »

They replied after a month (s/be 10 days)

Does this mean 'should be'? If so, should be according to what? Is there a document showing published standards for reply to your complaint?

Are these people an accredited organisation? Who accredits them? I suggest that you send them another letter saying that your next complaint will be to the accrediting body.....

raddy59

Hi JB
The syllabus set aside 50% of the marks for programming, performance and communication - quite separate from 50% for technical aspects of the performance. These were not commented on at all in the Report.

Their own procedures stated that a reply to a query would be received within 10 working days - I received a reply after prompting a month after my initial contact.

I took it higher to the head of exams - after 2 weeks i have had nothing, not even an acknowledgement

The organisation is attached to the university of west london.

Manxman_in_exile

I don't fully understand either.


I presume this was a practical exam (eg some sort of musical performance)?


Are you saying there is some sort of marking scheme whereby certain proportions of the total marks available are allocated across different aspects of the performance (eg 10% for this, 35% for that etc...) and that some aspects of your performance simply haven't been taken account of in your final mark? (So that you've only been assessed on a total of say 60% of the marks available rather than 100%?).


I think I'd go back to the examining body and explain exactly what you are querying or complaining about. It may be a simple error(*). If UWL is the accrediting body, be prepared to go to them.


(*) 30 years ago my niece sat an A level in law. To her disappointment she was awarded the lowest grade possible. (Can't remember if it would have been F = Fail or U = Unclassified?). It prevented her going to university that year. She appealed and was regraded to "A", the highest possible. Hard to believe but true! It worked out in her favour as she was eventually able to attend a much better university than she'd originally intended.

Rosemary7391

I assume you've not just got a report with a blank "technical aspects" section? I would assume this would be commented together with the performance and communication sections alongside each piece but awarded marks separately.

Still struggling to think of what organisation this could be. Are the exams recorded?

Manxman_in_exile

I don't seem to be able to edit my previous post.


The point I was trying to make about my niece is that the examiners must(?) have lost some of the pages or answers from her paper. And that this must(?) have been realised when they remarked it. How this could happen I don't know.


If I understand your OP correctly, it sounds to me like you are asking a similar question. For example, your performance should have been assessed and marked on, say, 6 elements, but the examiners report and final mark clearly show you've only been marked on four elements. From what you have posted I assume this must be obvious from the report?

raddy59

manxman:
it was a practical exam with a syllabus split between performance and technical elements (50/50 roughly). the examiners could mark each piece seperately (mad) or the perf. as a whole. The examiners marked each piece commenting technically neglecting to comment on the perf. elements. I pointed this out on my initial communication, and their reply ignored my point and instead raised an unconnected point which, as I said, could not possibly have occurred.
This is now 2 months after the exam, I have been in touch with the chief examiner and now his boss. I had to chase the first guy up as he had not responded within the 10 days laid down. Now his boss, head of exams similarly has ignored my second letter concerning the irrelevance and impossibility of the chief examiners reply.
"From what you have posted I assume this must be obvious from the report?" - yeah, you would have thought so. But rather than take this on board they kept me hanging on until I had to book a resit then gave a facile answer



Rosemary - you're almost there with the marking. In his previous exam they did comment on each piece but made comments relating to performance elements so that was ok. I got 90%. These 2 examiners did not comment at all on performance elements.

The exam is not recorded, but I have kept my points as objective and proveable as I could
Certain elements are obviously missing from the exam report
You can't play the form of music they say I played over the pieces I actually played - it's not possible.

they didn't acknowledge my reply to their point which I mailed on 31.5, so I re-sent recorded which they have received today.

If they could acknowledge the problem instead of trying to get out of it I would get my resit fee back (£400) and a avoid the resit which is costly in time and money

Perhaps I should go to the big boss in UWL and not wait any longer?

Manxman_in_exile

raddy59 wrote: »

The examiners marked each piece commenting technically neglecting to comment on the perf. elements...

...These 2 examiners did not comment at all on performance elements...

...The exam is not recorded,...


... You can't play the form of music they say I played over the pieces I actually played - it's not possible.

So the Examiners Feedback (or report, whatever) clearly and unambiguously omits to mark certain elements of your performance? Obviously I can't see the feedback, but if it's clearly deficient or lacking in this respect then it must be obvious to them that the scoring is wrong. Unless you are completely misunderstanding how your performance was to be assessed I don't see how they can't agree with you - unless they are clearly embarrassed!


I had to do a course for work in 2007 having last sat an exam in 1982. I was amazed at the marking schemes we were provided with before each assessment. They were extremely specific and prescriptive. I thought they were daft as it would be possible to fail an absolutely brilliant piece of work because it didn't fit into the scheme. At the same time, completely mediocre pieces of work could get very high marks by ticking all the boxes. It was almost like learning by rote. But the good thing was you could argue about the mark you got because the scheme was so prescriptive. Is that not the case here?


Also I don't understand how a live performance music exam isn't recorded. How do you dispute the examiners' remarks if there's no permanent record like with a written script?


I'd be thinking about UWL i9f they're not (or refusing to) follow their own procedures.

Manxman_in_exile

jobbingmusician wrote: »

What does this mean? It could mean the following (and possibly other things)

1. The exam tested all areas of the syllabus, but some of the questions weren't marked. (how would you know?)

2. All areas of the syllabus were tested, but some of the questions had no feedback on whatever report was sent to you.

3. The exam failed to test some areas of the syllabus, (Common, and I don't see a problem with this)

The Op's use of the term syllabus confuses me too. I've never sat an exam that tested all parts of the syllabus - it wouldn't be possible for any syllabus I've ever studied - it would take days, weeks or months. Maybe syllabus has a different meaning in music exams.


If the OP is so sure that this is wrong, I think it's worrying the examining body can't see this. I hope the OP has the correct understanding of how this practical exam was to be assessed/marked.

Rosemary7391

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

Also I don't understand how a live performance music exam isn't recorded. How do you dispute the examiners' remarks if there's no permanent record like with a written script?

I think most of them aren't, for sheer practicality. That'd be a huge volume of data, and you'd have to trail recording equipment and a technician around with the examiner. Plus they'd not be really able to re mark it from the recording unless it was an extremely good recording, and setting that up would take far too long. I was just wondering really!

OP - you're comparing this experience to a previous exam. Was the previous exam a diploma level or graded level? It'd help if we could go look at the syllabus I think. But usually there are massive changes in exam format, requirements and marking between graded and diploma level exams.

I'm guessing that it isn't a "classical" instrument/genre from some of your comments - that's where my experience is in but there will be some crossover of course.

raddy59

Jazz performance - licentiate so level 6? (Hons level)
Basically it's an LLCM jazz performance = 3rd diploma level.
Because it's performance they are testing your ability to present a well thought out program to the audience, to communicate effectively and engage them. So you can;t go on stage and sit there like an imbecile, say nuthin', dressed in rags and present a program of mega fast mega loud avant garde/freeform no matter how technically "good" you play - at least thats what I thought and that's how I approached my previous....