FOR some Junior Cert music students, a poor quality tape and difficult questions added up to a highly testing examination.
Sister Anne O'Flanagan, schools' management subject representative and a teacher in Moate Cullege, Co Westmeath, criticised the quality of the tape in her school. However, Ms Louise O'Connell, chairperson of the Music Teachers Association, said that the tape quality was fine in her school.
At higher level, Sister O'Flanagan criticised section F of question 2, which asked students how they would know from looking at the score - that the excerpt was written in the key of B minor. She also noted that the piece of Irish music in question 3 was not played as it was written.
"It was not a problem for most students," she said. "But, from an examination point of view, it should have been correct." Section B of this question, which asked students whether the group of singers consisted of male and female voices or male voices only, was difficult to answer because of the poor quality tape, she said.
Ms Veronica O'Sullivan, ASTI subject representative, said that the answer to section D of this question, which asked about a single held note, was not obvious to teachers, so it would not be obvious to students.
In question 4, the dictation exercise, the metronome was in a different key to the key of the melody, Sister O'Flanagan said. Ms O'Connell said that, while she welcomed the advent of a metronome, it should be unpitched. The dictation was also made more difficult by the fact that students were not given the key chord or the doh, she added.
Students' chosen works appeared in one question only question 5, Sister O'Flanagan noted. The question itself was fine, she said, but section D asked students about a repeated rhythmic figure played during verse one. "In fact, this was played during the introduction to verse one and it couldn't be heard during verse one," she said.
According to Ms O'Sullivan, "You would have to be Mozart to pick up the figure in the first verse.
It was very difficult to know what was expected in gene studies Sister O'Flanagan said. In particular, she pointed to the "confusing" language used in section C, in which students were asked to state two ways in which the pieces they had named were similar or dissimilar. The length of space left blank on the paper for answers to the final section of this question would encourage long answers, she said. "The layout (in this question) could be quite upsetting for students," she added.
Ms O'Sullivan also commented unfavourably on the length of space left for answers.
Ms O'Connell was critical of the uneven style of questioning, with some questions giving students a menu of answers from which they could choose and others simply leaving a blank line for the answer.
"We think that giving students choices is more helpful than giving them a blank dotted line," she said. "It's going back to the old Inter Cert style, where students have to analyse the question and then make a judgment before they answer."
Ms O'Sullivan pointed to a number of hidden difficulties. In question 2(b) there were three families of instruments playing, but only the strings were obvious, she said. It would have been better to have printed the music in question 1(c). Question 2(a) was ambiguous, in that the question could refer to a particular piece or the whole suite, she commented.
At ordinary level, Sister O'Flanagan said the paper was manageable, with the exception of one question in the section on chosen songs and works. The question asked students to imagine that they had been asked to arrange The Battle Hymn of the Republic for performance at a religious ceremony. This would be impossible for ordinary level students, she said.
Ms O'Connell was also critical of this question, while Ms O'Sullivan said this sort of open ended question was not suited to ordinary-level students.
Ms O'Connell also pointed to section question 2(f), which included a semiquaver. There is no mention of semiquavers in the syllabus, she pointed out.
Ms O'Sullivan noted that in question 7, the key was named on the higher level paper but it wasn't named on the ordinary level. However, minor quibbles apart, the ordinary level paper was voted reasonable by the teachers consulted.