Hello and welcome to this pre-recorded event for GCSE Music (the current specification):
Controlled Assessment Marking Training for Composing Unit 2
To help you get the most out of this session, you may want to have the following documents
handy as we will refer to them during the session:
* The specification containing all the relevant mark schemes. You will be guided to the correct
pages at the appropriate points in the presentation. * The audio files which are the recordings
of the candidates' compositions. This is available as a zip file and will take some time to download,
so you should pause the video at the end of this slide to download and unzip the files.
* The scores for the candidates' performances. Now pause the video and download the materials
and unzip the audio files.
The specification is divided into three units: performing, composing and listening and appraising.
The first two units are internally assessed and externally moderated. The third unit is
examined in a written paper which is sat some time in May or June and is externally marked.
Performing and composing are each worth 30% of the overall marks and the written paper
is worth 40% of the marks for the award. All work for performing and composing must
be marked by the teacher examiner and sent to the moderator to arrive by 15th May in
the exam year. The deadline is always 15th May, so if this falls on a weekend the work
is expected to be with the moderator on the Friday before this.
For Unit 2, candidates must present two pieces of work. They can be either 2 compositions,
2 arrangements, or one of each. In general, because of the nature of the mark schemes,
almost all submissions are compositions rather than arrangements. As such, all the examples
in this video will be compositions and we will refer to the candidates' work as compositions
for the rest of the presentation for the sake of fluency, but arrangements are acceptable
anywhere a composition is mentioned. It is very important that the compositions
relate to an area of study (this is abbreviated to AoS on the slide). The two compositions
must relate to two different areas of study. It is possible for a composition to relate
to multiple areas of study, as we will see on the next slide.
Compositions can be as long as they need to be, but the combined duration of the two compositions
should be between 2 and 4 minutes. There is no fixed penalty for falling outside these
time limits, but overly long or short compositions tend to be self-penalising, particularly under
the criteria of structure and development.
Links to the areas of study are important, but they can be quite loose. It is not necessary
to link a composition to a set work, just the overall area of study title.
Links to area of study 1 are generally to do with the structure. Any structure in common
usage in the Baroque, Classical or Romantic eras is fine, no matter what the actual style
of the piece. It is acceptable to produce a pop song in rondo form and relate it to
AoS 1. A pastiche is acceptable as a submission linked to this area of study, but is not essential.
Links to area of study 2 will be pieces in any 20th or 21st century style. By far the
most common submissions for area of study 2 pieces are serialist or expressionist works
and minimalist compositions. However, it should be noted that the Westside Story piece is
in this area of study, so it is acceptable for a song from a musical to be submitted
as an area of study 2 piece. Area of study 3 is the most easily understood
- compositions must be in any pop style from ragtime and blues to the styles of the present
day. A piece can be submitted as an area of study
4 piece if it has a link to any world music style. Note that it does not have to link
to just African or Indian styles, but can relate to any culture or be a fusion of any
two or more cultures. Often instrumentation is used as a link to area of study 4.
One of the most commonly asked questions is 'can my students submit 2 songs as long as
they relate to different areas of study even if they are essentially the same style?',
to which the answer is 'Yes, as long as they have a clear link to two different areas of
study.' For example, a dance track may have a repeating
bass line, so it could fall under area of study 3 because it is in a pop style or area
of study 1 because it uses what is essentially a ground bass.
While it is easy to make links, it is strongly advised that composition is taught from the
perspective of analysing the set works - it is good practice to have a clear brief for
any composition work at this level, thus knowing where the links are going to be before setting
out rather than giving essentially free compositions and trying to link them to an area of study
afterwards. It is possible for compositions to link to
multiple areas of study. For example, a song from a musical in a pop style in rondo form
containing tabla and sitar could link to any of the 4 areas!
As a general introduction to marking compositions, it is useful to have an overview of the mark
scheme. If you have not already done so, please pause the video and download the specification.
The composition mark scheme is on page 48-52. It is split into 9 different criterion, each
of which can score between 0 and 5 marks. In practice, it is most unusual for a criterion
to score 0 marks, so it is essentially a range of 1-5.
When reading through the criteria and comparing it to compositions, it is good to have a general
overview as set out on the slide. If you start by assuming a criterion scores 3 and then
move up or down if you are particularly impressed or dissatisfied then you will be closer to
an accurate mark than starting at 1 and working up or starting at 5 and working down.
The word 'functional' used to describe a mark of 2 means that the composition does approximately
what it is supposed to in that area, but is either very basic in how it achieves it or
it has some awkward moments or it is just there to make up the numbers.
The first three criteria - A, B and C are compulsory. All compositions must be marked
using these criteria plus three others from the remaining 6 options. You should choose
criteria that best benefit the candidate. Although certain types of composition tend
to favour the same optional criteria, it is good to remain open minded in case one of
the criteria proves to gain the candidate an extra mark. If the candidate has made many
mistakes in how they have harmonised their piece, it does not make sense to chose harmony
as an optional criteria, but their rhythmic work may gain them more marks. Students do
not select which criteria are chosen to mark their work - this is entirely the job of the
teacher examiner.
If you haven't already done so, pause the video now and download the audio files and
composition scores. The first composition is linked to area of
study 2. The teacher examiner (labelled 'TE' on the slide) chose optional criteria D, F
and G. Use the mark scheme on page 48-52 of the specification
to judge the work. If you find that you are torn between two marks (for example, you aren't
sure whether to award a 4 or a 5 for a given criterion), hedge your bets until the end.
Then, if you have two criteria with split decisions, go up to the higher mark with one
of them and down to the lower mark with the other. This is almost a way of awarding half
marks and ensures that you avoid going too high or low with the overall mark.
This is a good example of writing in this genre. It makes imaginative use of structure,
texture and melody. There is genuine development of ideas rather than simple layering of musical
lines. The orchestration is imaginative with several different string techniques used.
There are three clear sections, but there is continuous growth throughout. Harmony would
have been an awkward criterion to choose and the teacher examiner has wisely steered clear
of this, going for Melody, texture and rhythm instead. The melody was just about worth 5
marks because of the interplay between the parts and the rhythmic nature of the melodies
which was very much in character for the piece as a whole. This piece merits more than one
listen as more and more good qualities come out on repeated listens.
The second composition is linked to area of study 1. The teacher examiner chose optional
criteria D, E and F. Use the mark scheme on page 48-52 of the specification
to judge the work. Make notes on your thoughts so you can compare them with the marks we
awarded on the next slide.
This is a generally pleasing piece with some development of the ABA structure and some
development of ideas, but it does have a few weaker moments. The harmony is generally good
with attempts at a change of key to B minor, if occasional awkward chords sometimes spring
out. There is a clear awareness of texture and some effective accompaniment patterns.
The third composition is also linked to area of study 1. The teacher examiner chose optional
criteria D, F and G. Use the mark scheme on page 48-52 of the specification
to judge the work. Make notes on your thoughts so you can compare them with the marks we
awarded on the next slide. Note that the bass line was given to the candidate (the teacher
examiner mentions this on the MUS200 form).
There are 2 counter melodies that run alongside the main melody. The piece could have been
a little longer to give it more chance to develop fully. The key change, although a
touch sudden, works fine and gives the piece a lift. The drum parts are well written. There
is a sensitive awareness of texture with clear textural contrasts in the piece. However,
it was not felt that the piece merited the full marks awarded by the teacher examiner
with the first 4 criteria felt just to satisfy the 'good' descriptor.
The fourth composition is linked to area of study 3. The teacher examiner chose optional
criteria E, F and G. Use the mark scheme on page 48-52 of the specification
to judge the work. Make notes on your thoughts so you can compare them with the marks we
awarded on the next slide.
This composition has a few interesting moments where clear melodic motifs jump out. It may
have been a better idea to choose melody as an option although there are only occasional
moments of lucidity in the melody. There is an occasional reggae feel although at one
point it is clear that the candidate has accidentally pushed the rhythm along an extra beat. It
is rather rambling, but a clear structure can still be detected. The rhythms generally
work fine. However, half of the criteria are a good example of the word 'functional'.
The fifth composition is linked to area of study 3. The teacher examiner chose optional
criteria D, E and G. Use the mark scheme on page 48-52 of the specification
to judge the work. Make notes on your thoughts so you can compare them with the marks we
awarded on the next slide.
This song has a somewhat unbalanced structure with a clear attempt at doing something a
little different. As always, the Sibelius 'voice' does not help to present the song
in its best light. If possible, it is a good idea to get either the candidate or another
suitable singer to sing the melody, even if it is just over the backing provided by Sibelius.
There is some suspect word setting in this composition, which is typical of work at this
level. Candidates often compose the melody first and then try to set their lyrics to
it afterwards or they attempt to programme the melody and do not quite manage to achieve
an accurate realisation of what they hear in their heads.
The last composition is linked to area of study 4. The teacher examiner chose optional
criteria E, F and H. However, the moderator felt it benefitted the candidate more to change
optional criterion H to G. Use the mark scheme on page 48-52 of the specification
to judge the work. Make notes on your thoughts so you can compare them with the marks we
awarded on the next slide.
Uses a modal tonality (on occasion!) which helps with the area of study 4 feel. There
is some development of ideas. The form is simple, but a little rambling. The dynamics
are OK, but the rhythm is more of a clear '4' mark criterion. The attempt at counterpoint
is appropriate, but not entirely successful, even if it should be credited for ambition.
Making good comments to justify the marks you have given is important. It is perfectly
acceptable to use the language taken directly from the mark scheme. Sometimes it is best
to write the comments first, based on what you hear and how you feel it relates to the
mark scheme and then add the numerical marks at the end. This will ensure that you are
not trying to justify a higher mark than the piece deserves. Comment on any features that
are important to the piece but which are not immediately obvious on first listen or from
a glance at the score. There is no harm in candidates pointing out specific techniques
on their scores. For example, showing when an inverted melody or a retrograde transposition
has been used.