Graded music examinations have been a global enterprise as well as a rite-of-passage for music students since the end of the 19th century. Recently, the exams have expanded from their core of Western classical genre to include newer styles with options for improvisation. This research article investigates the influence of these examinations on the teaching and learning of improvisation within instrumental music lessons. Through a case study approach, the study examines how pedagogical practices surrounding improvisation are shaped by the pressures of assessment. Observations of weekly lessons reveal a significant shift in teaching strategies as exam dates approach, transitioning from open-ended exploration to a narrowed focus on specific skills required for success in examinations. The findings highlight the necessity of clear feedback from examiners to enhance the learning experience. Additionally, teachers are encouraged to reconsider the intended audiences of improvisation, balancing examiner expectations with the creative expressions valued by broader concert audiences.
AkrofiE.FloluJ. (2007). The colonial influence on music education in Ghana and South Africa. In AkrofiE.SmitM.ThorsenS. (Eds.), Music and identity: Transformation and negotiation (pp. 143–157). African Sun Media.
BabinA. (1993). Music conservatories in Canada and the piano examination system for the preparatory student: A historical survey and comparative analysis [Unpublished MA dissertation]. University of Ottawa.
5.
BaileyD. (1993). Improvisation: Its nature and practice in music. Moorland Publishing.
6.
BertinettoA. (2016). “Do not fear mistakes–there are none”: The mistake as surprising experience of creativity in jazz. In SantiniM.ZorziE. (Eds.) Education as jazz: Interdisciplinary sketches on a new metaphor (pp. 85–100). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
7.
BiasuttiM. (2017). Teaching improvisation through processes. Applications in music education and implications for general education. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(911), 1–8.
8.
BiasuttiM.FrezzaL. (2009). Dimensions of music improvisation. Creativity Research Journal, 21(2–3), 232–242.
9.
BrinkmannS.KvaleS. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative interviewing (Vol. 3). Sage.
10.
BullA. (2015). The musical body: How gender and class are reproduced among young people playing classical music in England [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Goldsmiths, University of London.
11.
CreechA.HallamS. (2003). Parent–teacher–pupil interactions in instrumental music tuition: A literature review. British Journal of Music Education, 20(1), 29–44.
12.
DavidsonJ.HoweM.MooreD.SlobodaJ. (1996). The role of parental influences in the development of musical performance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(4), 399–412.
13.
DavidsonJ.ScuttS. (1999). Instrumental learning with exams in mind: A case study investigating teacher, student and parent interactions before, during and after a music examination. British Journal of Music Education, 16(1), 79–95.
14.
DumlavwallaD. T. (2011). Approaching the examiner’s chair: Chronicling the experiences of piano examiner apprentices for the Royal Conservatory of Music [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Toronto.
15.
FaircloughN. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
16.
FranklinE. (2022). Going beyond the page: Reintroducing improvisation into classical music pedagogy through partimenti [PhD Thesis]. Indiana University.
17.
HoW. C. (2009). The perceptions of music learning among parents and students in Hong Kong. Bulleting of the Council for Research in Music Education, 181, 71–93.
18.
JaneP. (2023). The arrival of graded music exams in New Zealand: A case study of Dunedin up to 1916. Journal of Historical Research in Music Education, 44(2), 172–201.
19.
Johnson-WilliamsE. (2015). Re-examining the academy: Music institutions and empire in nineteenth century London [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Yale University.
20.
KokR.-M. (2011). Music for a postcolonial child: Theorizing Malaysian memories. In GreenL. (Ed.) Learning, teaching, and musical identity: Voices across cultures (pp. 73–90). Indiana University Press.
21.
KruegerJ.SaliceA. (2021). Towards a wide approach to improvisation. In RavnS.HøffdingS.McGuirkJ. (Eds.), Philosophy of Improvisation: Interdisciplinary perspectives on theory and practice (pp. 50–69). Routledge.
22.
MarinoS. (2021). Improvisation in Pop-Rock Music. In BertinettoA.RutaM. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy and improvisation in the arts (pp. 431–445). Routledge.
23.
MitchellN. (2012). Beginning and intermediate piano students’ experiences participating in evaluative performances [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Toronto.
24.
NerlandM. (2007). One-to-one teaching as cultural practice: Two case studies from an academy of music. Music Education Research, 9(3), 399–416.
25.
OlsenP. (2019). Assessing improvisation in graded music examinations: Conflicting practices and perceptions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Cambridge.
26.
RossV. (2009). External music examiners: Micro–macro tasks in quality assurance practices. Music Education Research, 11(4), 473–484.
27.
SaichaieK. (2011). Representation on college and university websites: An approach using critical discourse analysis [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Iowa.
28.
SaidonZ. L.ShahS. M. (2014). Developing an assessment and certification system for Malaysian traditional music based on the international graded music examinations model: Challenges & concerns. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 141, 561–565.
29.
Saint-GermierP.CanonneC. (2021). Improvisation, Actions, and Processes. In BertnettoA.RutaM., (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy and Improvisation in the Arts (pp. 114–128). Routledge.
30.
SalamanW. (1994). The role of graded examinations in music. British Journal of Music Education, 11(3), 209–221.
31.
SangiorgioA. (2023). Tradition and creativity combined: Undergraduate students’ use of western classical music as a source of ideas for collaborative improvisation and composition. In SangiorinoA. (Ed.), Creative interactions: Creative learning, creative teaching, and teaching for group creativity in music education (pp. 167–183). University of Music and Theatre Munich.
32.
SawyerK. (2007). Improvisation and teaching. Critical Studies in Improvisation, 3(2), 1–4.
StanleyM.BrookerR.GilbertR. (2002). Examiner perceptions of using criteria in music performance assessment. Research Studies in Music Education, 18(1), 46–56.
35.
Trinity College London. (2017a). Assessment criteria: Classical & jazz.
36.
Trinity College London. (2017b). Jazz woodwind syllabus (Vols. 2017–2022).
37.
TseY. N. (2024). The perceptions and cultural persistence of Graded music examinations, and their impacts on instrumental teaching and learning in Hong Kong [PhD Thesis]. UCL (University College London).
38.
TyeJ. K. C. (2004). A survey of the current status and practices of piano teachers in Penang, Malaysia: Preparation for the practical piano examinations of the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music, London. University of South Carolina.
39.
Van DykL. (2016). The enduring presence of Trinity College London in music in Johannesburg: A case study [PhD Thesis]. North-West University (South Africa), Potchefstroom Campus.
40.
WrightD. C. (2013). The Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music: A social and cultural history. Boydell Press.
41.
YinR. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.
42.
ZhangL. (2019). Cultural colonialism, academic rigor, or both? A study of ABRSM examinations in Northern China. Visions of Research in Music Education, 34, Article 3.
