Teacher's Guide Cambridge Pre-U MUSIC Available for teaching ...

68
Cambridge Pre-U Teacher Guide
this knowledge for themselves: very short recorded examples (and notated examples, if that is more
appropriate) strengthen what might otherwise be a weak second-hand assertion. The ability to select
brief, relevant and telling extracts is one of the skills that demonstrate their musical judgement and
their independent understanding of their topic. For this reason, musical illustrations accompanying
the dissertation should never be recordings of whole pieces or movements in their entirety.
It can sometimes be difficult for candidates to find their own words to explain something they have
read in a book. It is very common for them to feel that a published author has said exactly what
needs to be said, but this can be extremely problematic if it leads them to reproduce such a comment
either in the exact words of the author or in a close paraphrase. Quotations may, of course, be used.
If so, they must always be placed in quotation marks and duly acknowledged, so that there is no
danger of plagiarism.
Implicit in all the Assessment Criteria, and mentioned explicitly in the Syllabus, is the need for the
dissertation to ‘demonstrate the candidate’s ability in critical thinking’. Critical thinking in Music
is not simply a case of consulting and synthesising a large number of scholarly texts. It has much
more to do with conveying a sense of what a candidate makes of the music itself, and of the ability to
form independent, purposeful and informed judgements about it. Scholarly texts can contribute to
this, but they need to be seen as a tool for study, not as an end in themselves. All sources consulted
must be listed in a comprehensive bibliography and discography – not only books, but also scores or
transcriptions, programme notes, CD sleeve notes, internet sites (with precise references), interviews,
performances and recordings.
In the early stages of the course a considerable amount of exploratory investigation should take
place. Candidates should then have an overall view of the field, be beginning to develop a clear
grasp of the specifics and be in a position to make a purposeful, realistic statement of their intentions
when their proposal is submitted to CIE. They may well need help thereafter in pacing themselves
through the next stages of the course. Some will inevitably find themselves at some point in a dead
end; others may feel overwhelmed by too broad a scope or a mass of disorganised material; many
may initially be baffled by the language of scholarly commentators. In the midst of such frustration,
support and encouragement will be necessary: in addition to planned group sessions, therefore,
access to a supervisor who may suggest ways of breaking the work down into a more manageable
sequence of tasks, or of narrowing the scope slightly, should always be possible. If the candidates
themselves do not realise that they are heading in an unfruitful direction, more active intervention
might be appropriate. The frequency and nature of such contacts should be summarised in the
Centre’s endorsement of the candidates’ statement that the work submitted is their own.
If the learning experience has been valuable for candidates they may well come to the end of their
presentation feeling that they have not adequately covered the ground. They may think that there
is more to discover and more to be said. When they recall their original proposal, if it was well
conceived, they will often realise that they have indeed achieved what they set out to do. What a
candidate sees as inadequacy at the end may need to be reflected back as the natural product of more
mature knowledge and depth of understanding, and that is precisely what this component seeks to
achieve.
www.cie.org.uk/cambridgepreu