PIANO
PEDAGOGY
FORUM
v. 6, no. 2/July 1, 2003

FORUM ON PIANO PEDAGOGY

Communicating and Interpreting Critical Commentary

Students and teachers devote a prodigious amount of time in the preparation of performances to be presented for adjudication. Yet, the actual time allowed for adjudication can be less than the length of the selection(s). Hence, an adjudicator needs to be efficient and offer educational suggestions. This article offers advice for the adjudicator to consider when writing evaluations for participants. It also suggests a framework for the teacher's and student's interpretation of those written comments made by the adjudicator.

Suggestions for First-Time Adjudicators

Imagine this scenario. A young high school piano contestant enters the audition room. She has meticulously prepared her program throughout the past nine months specifically for this moment, but is all too aware of the fact that she has only a limited time to display her efforts and talent. Suddenly, all of her anxieties rise to the surface, overriding her usual focus and clarity. She timidly approaches the piano and briefly glances at the judge, who is still frantically finishing the evaluation of the last performer. After waiting patiently for what feels like hours, she is given the signal to start. As she begins her hands and knees shake out of control, her mind races wildly, and she subsequently rushes through the first piece, forgetting her well-learned musical gestures. With each solo, her lack of control becomes increasingly obvious as she attempts to avoid memory slips and she senses the judge's apparent disapproval as he squirms in his chair. After each mistake, she envisions the situation as a musical catastrophe and dwells on all the possible negative comments the judge could be writing. After performing, the student suppresses her impulse to cry and leaves the room with scant eye contact from the judge and a peremptory "Thank you. That will be all." A week later, her teacher, who is rather new to the field, receives the comment sheets showing a score of 72 out of 100, but with only one comment: "Phrasing, deary." The student communicates to her that the performance was not her best, yet is aghast at her low score. As a result, the entire experience was nothing more than a stress-inducing and uninformative experience for both teacher and student.

Unfortunately, a scenario similar to this did happen. The teacher consequently dropped her membership from the local organization and now harbors strong reservations about entering her students in any festival or competition again. Though it was the responsibility of the teacher and student in question to deal with proper preparation, stage deportment and performance anxieties, the judge's job was to provide thorough and constructive criticism for any points deducted as well as pointing out areas of strength. Here was a moment when a judge could have been a true facilitator for learning, yet he chose to be far less than that. Perhaps he was fatigued or behind schedule, but his unwillingness to provide articulate and instructive prose made it a negative experience for the student and teacher alike. Adjudicators have the opportunity to share instructive insights and to provide motivational advice that can enhance the growth of both the student and teacher. Although adjudicators are required choose a winner or to assign a score, the evaluation systems and criteria are subjective and require interpretation. The very nature of interpretation lends itself to controversy, but exemplary judges know this and can still navigate the treacherous waters diplomatically. Verbal and written comments that can be constructively utilized by the student and teacher can promote and encourage positive musical growth.

What ARE the qualities of a good judge?

When asked this question, festival coordinators will initially mention the more obvious qualities that they would like to see, such as promptness, courteousness, the ability to stay within the time limits of the festival's schedule, legible handwriting and quality as well as quantity of written comments. However, these coordinators may want to expand this list to include more criteria:

• Willingness to address the positive aspect of a student's playing first and then to offer constructive, not destructive, criticism.
• Willingness to address the student with age-appropriate wording, when possible, so that the teacher does not need to explain the written comments to the student and parents.
• Awareness of one's personal nonverbal cues and how this may be interpreted by the performer.
• Ability to make the performer feel at ease. One smile, a little eye contact and some humor go a long way.
• Ability to separate age and height of the student with the level of competition for which he/she is entered. Students who begin piano at a later age and enter the festival or competition at a lower level should not be judged harshly. Likewise, younger students who enter into an advanced level should be assessed at that very level without age and size factoring into the critique.
• Ability to maintain balance and perspective with regard to one's own criteria versus those of the specific festivals or competitions.

As a judge for any festival or competition, one should first find out from the coordinators what the primary objectives are and direct his or her scoring and remarks to reflect those particular goals. One need not compromise his or her standards or aesthetics to be invited to judge again. If it is a real competition, then choices do have to be made and some students will have to be eliminated from the next stages. If it is a festival wherein the student competes against a standard, rather than other contestants, then there is certainly less pressure to make the "right" decision because comments are rarely challenged. However, the judge is still professionally obligated to give substantial and constructive feedback. It is of primary importance that the judge realize his or her potential to spark a participant's appreciation as much for the creative process, if not more than, for the goal. Doing so helps to set the stage for a more positive learning experience, regardless of the ranking or outcome. If the old adage is true that one learns more from his or her mistakes than from successes, then adjudicators should take into account the fact that students certainly can benefit from many other aspects of the experience beyond receiving a score or prize. A truly effective judge understands Alfred Einstein's famous quote: "Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted."

Suggestions for Teachers New to the Field

Teachers can lay the groundwork for the student's interpretation of comments by competition or festival judges. Explain to the student before the event that there are many ways to analyze a performance and that each judge will convey unique and individualistic ideas in his or her comments, just as every player will present his or her own style of performance. Remember that students are very trusting of and greatly value their teacher's advice and opinions. Through a filter of time and long acquaintance with the teacher, they begin to process the meaning and content of the criticism and suggestions. However, a student does not have the benefit of developing the same long-term, trusting relationship with a judge.

One helpful activity that can be employed in the studio is the rehearsal of a competition or audition performance. Ask the student to perform the audition as you write comments. Write with a loud and exaggerated volume as the student plays. When trying this the first time, write only positive comments for the student, employing a noisy and aggressive writing style. Asking students to stop and start (as many adjudicators do) is also good practice to include in this activity. When the student has finished the performance, ask him or her to imagine what you have written on the comment sheet. Students will typically go through their performance pointing out the mistakes, yet ignoring the many positive aspects of the audition. When you reveal the positive writing you have produced on the critique sheet, students will be amazed to learn that they were projecting negative feelings onto their "pretend" judge even before they read the critique.

Students with experience in critiquing the performances of others can generally receive feedback in a more constructive manner. Therefore, master classes or studio performances can yield a myriad of ways to reinforce the concepts involved in critiquing a performance. Students critiquing their peers will generally have little to say when first asked to analyze the presentation of their peer. However, stronger pressing of the issue will generally lead to a lengthier verbal response. When asked to comment on a particular performance, many students will say, "That was nice" or "That was beautiful." Encourage students to develop their rationale for deciding what makes a performance "nice" or "beautiful." Offer suggestions for explaining or expanding their description using music vocabulary, such as a "beautiful legato sound" or a "nice pianissimo contrast." Likewise, ask students to suggest some specific areas of improvement for their peers. In gaining a more discerning ear in the analysis of other performances, students will build and strengthen their own problem solving skills and practice techniques.

Following the competition, make sure you receive and review the judgeÕs comments before the student has the opportunity to read them. Students are eager to learn of their ratings or performance critiques, but a "pre-reading" by the teacher can greatly aid in focusing the comments of the judges, summarizing the content and sorting perceptions of inadvertent negativity. When discussing the summary with the student, remember to emphasize both the positive comments and the negative comments. Positive comments can reinforce the great strides made in their artistic efforts, yet students tend to hear only the negative comments.

The teacher should identify commonalties in the remarks of the judging panel. If all of the judges specify the same areas of strengths and weakness, then these items might garner more relevancy than a comment made by an individual adjudicator. Finally, realize that just as each performance is specific to the day, time, place, mood, motivation, and preparation of the performer, the judge experiences the same uniqueness. Even the most professional judge experiences a bad day and may reflect this in the critique. Students should be counseled that each competition is a chance to add something new to their artistic development and that judges, like artists, are entitled to their individual form of expression. While this does not entitle adjudicators to be harsh and unprofessional (and we would prefer to think that this did not exist within our profession), it is best that students learn to find value in both positive and negative comments and opinions of others. Most importantly, the crucial component of artistic development is nurturing one's own sense of self-esteem and musical expression.

© 2003 University of South Carolina School of Music