Abstract
This chapter reports on aspects of a larger project conducted on learning and teaching practices in a tertiary musical theatre program. Learning and teaching activities that focus strongly on performance outcomes are often difficult to assess objectively, particularly in relation to the balance of process and performance. This project reported on here sought to illuminate the perceptions of participants in relation to assessment practices. The site in question has implemented and evaluated a process of continuous assessment in which staff members allocate marks in relation to student progress on a weekly basis. The students are given access to this feedback at three intervals throughout the semester, alongside informal feedback. Marks are awarded for up to 20 sub-activities within the broad areas of acting, dance with sub-categories for each of jazz, tap and ballet, performance project, singing and speech. This assessment process is embedded in a degree structure that has adopted a sliding scale of formative and summative assessment across the 3-year degree: the first year is marked almost entirely on process and the final year almost entirely on performance. Through focus group interviews with participants, the efficacy of this assessment process was documented. Students in the second year of the program were interviewed to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of such an approach, though this chapter focuses on teachers’ experience of the process. The findings give a nuanced picture of the participants’ interface with the assessment process. These findings, combined with artefacts from the program are presented as a model for teachers in institutional and private studio settings. It is anticipated that this may be of interest to those who seek to prepare students for the realities of the profession in musical theatre and other voice-based training programs.
An earlier version of this chapter was presented at the International Congress of Voice Teachers in July 2013.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Carey, G., & Lebler, D. (2012). Reforming a bachelor of music program: A case study. International Journal of Music Education, 31(4), 312–317. doi:10.1177/0255761412459160.
Carey, G., Lebler, D., & Gall, S. (2012). Investigating the one-to-one teaching model in higher music education: Developing a collaborative model of inquiry. Scientia Paedagogica Experimentali: International Journal of Experimental Research in Education, 47(2), 175–198.
Draper, P., & Harrison, S. (2011). Through the eye of a needle: The emergence of practice-led doctorates in music. British Journal of Music Education, 28(1), 87–102. doi:10.1017/S0265051710000434.
Esposto, A. S., & Weaver, D. (2011). Continuous team assessment to improve student engagement and active learning. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 8(1), 1–11. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol8/iss1/8
Freire, P. (1982). Creating alternative research methods. Learning to do it by doing it. In B. Hall, A. Gillette, & R. Tandon (Eds.), Creating knowledge: A monopoly (pp. 29–37). New Delhi, India: Society for Participatory Research in Asia.
Harrison, S. D. (2012). Letting go: An auto-ethnography of supervising the research higher degree in music. International Journal of Music Education, 30(2), 99–110. doi:10.1177/0255761412442769.
Harrison, S. D., Lebler, D., Carey, G., Hitchcock, M., & O’Bryan, J. (2012). Making music or gaining grades? Assessment practices in tertiary music ensembles. British Journal of Music Education, 30(1), 27–42.
Hernandez, R. (2012). Does continuous assessment in higher education support student learning? Higher Education, 64, 489–502. doi:10.1007/s10734-012-9506-7.
Kaufman, J., Baer, J., Cole, J., & Sexton, J. A. (2008). Comparison of expert and nonexpert raters using the consensual assessment technique. Creativity Research Journal, 20(2), 171–178. doi:10.1080/10400410802059929.
Lebler, D., Harrison, S., Carey, G., & Cain, M. (2013, February 14–15). Assessment in music: Consensus moderation of claims for learning outcomes in music courses. In J. Holmes (Ed.), The creative arts learning and teaching symposium, Hobart. Hobart, Australia: University of Tasmania.
Parkes, K. (2010). Performance assessment: Lessons from performers. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 98–106.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). Introduction. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The Sage handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 5–10). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sabey, P., Harrison, S., & O’Bryan, J. (2012, October 26). Learning to perform musical theatre: Continuous assessment as preparation for the profession. Paper presented at the Performers Voice Symposium, Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music, Singapore.
Shepard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.
Stanley, M., Brooker, R., & Gilbert, R. (2002). Examiner perceptions of using criteria in music performance assessment. Research Studies in Music Education, 18(1), 46–56.
Trotter, E. (2006). Student perceptions of continuous summative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(5), 505–521.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sabey, P., Harrison, S.D., O’Bryan, J. (2015). Musical Theatre Assessment: Perspectives on the Efficacy of Continuous Assessment. In: Lebler, D., Carey, G., Harrison, S. (eds) Assessment in Music Education: from Policy to Practice. Landscapes: the Arts, Aesthetics, and Education, vol 16. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10274-0_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10274-0_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-10273-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-10274-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)