Klarinet Archive - Posting 000948.txt from 1998/07

From: Roger Garrett <rgarrett@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] Re: "Pedistool"
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 10:28:56 -0400

On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 SDSCHWAEG@-----.com wrote:

> In a message dated 7/24/98 12:54:38 AM Central Daylight Time, webler@-----.net
> writes:
> << "However, I wonder how inflated these competition ratings are. It's
> not very helpful to and individual receives a high rating if it does not
> truly reflect reality. Is the system designed to make students feel
> good, or is it an honest appraisal of their actual ability?" >>

SDSCHWAEG@-----.com wrote:

> This is a tough one...at a high school solo/ensemble contest, what standard
> should be applied when trying to assign a rating? Often, I hear judges who
> are college instructors criticized for using "college standards" when they
> don't give out many firsts.

Being one of those college instructors who frequently judges, I can agree
with your comment about using different standards. However, some of us
have taught at the level that we are judging and are fairly adept at
knowing where a student should be and deciding (in a given geographical
area) how to rate a student's playing within those parameters. A superior
rating (I) is difficult to get - and every form I have used has been
fairly specific with the requirements for achieving such a rating.

> In any case, I think the comments are far more
> valuable than the ratings, and am always appreciative when a judge gives my
> students helpful comments that back up the ratings given. I dislike it when a
> student is marked down in a particular category but no comments are made.

Yup! Isn't that the worst part? I always get a cramp by the end of the
day from so much writing. But I think that many people just get so tired
of writing the same thing regarding sound production, use of air,
ariticulation, and technique/hand position (not giving excuses....just
trying to present a possible reason for not doing their job well).

> Best is when the judge not only says what they think could be improved, but
> gives a suggestion as to how to do it (especially if the suggestion is
> something I've been telling the kid for months!). Unfortunately, given the
> short period of time allotted to each student, it's really hard for the judges
> to be that thorough - I guess that gets back to your question of what the
> ratings themselves are supposed to communicate.
> Susan Schwaegler

Susan.....

One other criticism is when a judge actually changes dynamic markings or
adds markings to the score, and then grades a student down for not doing
that interpretation. I had a student recently do the 1st movement of
Mozart Concerto (yes, on a Bb - but she's a 7th grader...give me a
break!), and the judge gave her wonderful comments, a I rating but at the
lowest score. Her rhythm continues to be unstable at times, but
everything else went very well. I was surprised that she lost points in
the area of phrasing - but one look at the score told me all I needed to
know....that the score had been altered throughout with the judge's
intperpretation (which I don't agree with) and then the student was graded
down in that area for not doing that interpretation. Go figure. I
resisted the urge to talk to the judge.....his job is hard enough.....and
besides, I know him and, generally, respect his clarinet teaching. I even
send students to him. I guess standards are going to be tough to figure
out - the most important thing, as you have already mentioned, is that
judges give lots of informaton and encouragement.

Roger Garrett
IWU

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org