Memorandum submitted by the Incorporated
Society of Musicians
SHORT SUMMARY
1. The Incorporated Society of Musicians (ISM)
is the professional body for music and musicians with over 5,400
members and approximately 100 corporate members.
2. There has been a substantial positive change
in the approach of OFSTED to music education from what was, in
2001, a harmful, negative approach to an approach which is far
more positive and pedagogically informed.
3. This change is in part due to a constantly
improving strong consultative approach by the OFSTED'S National
Adviser for Music.
ABOUT THE
INCORPORATED SOCIETY
OF MUSICIANS
1.1 The Incorporated Society of Musicians (ISM) is
the professional body for music and musicians.
1.2 Sir Adrian Boult, Sir Thomas Beecham, Sir Malcolm
Sargent, The Lord Menuhin OM KBE (Yehudi Menuhin), Sir David Willcocks
and Dame Gillian Weir are all past chairs of the Incorporated
Society of Musicians. Our internationally recognised Distinguished
Musician Award, first awarded in 1976, has been received by Sir
William Walton OM, Jacqueline du Pre OBE, Sir Michael Tippett
OM CH CBE, Sir Colin Davis CBE, Sir Charles Mackerras AC CH CBE
and Pierre Boulez.
1.3 Founded in 1882, we have over 5,400 individual
members who come from all branches of the profession: soloists,
orchestral and ensemble performers, composers, teachers, academics,
a current Mercury Prize nominee and students. Our corporate membership
of approximately 100 organisations includes Classic FM, the Associated
Board of the Royal Schools of Music (ABRSM), the Worshipful Company
of Musicians, the Association of British Orchestras, all the conservatoires,
several universities and specialist music schools.
1.4 We are independent of government and not financially
dependent on any third party. Our Chief Executive, Deborah Annetts,
now chairs the Music Education Council, the umbrella body for
music education in the UK.
OFSTED AND MUSIC
EDUCATION
2.1 We believe it would be helpful to remind
the committee of an inspection report by OFSTED which was widely
criticised when published by the Times Educational Supplement
in December 2001.[8]
This will serve to illustrate the transformation that has occurred
in recent years.
2.2 A school music department had been "heavily
criticised for placing too much emphasis on fun and enjoyment".
2.3 In his paper on this OFSTED report, published
in 2003 in the British Journal of Music Education (BJME) a paper
titled OFSTED, fun, and learning: a case study of a school
music inspection,[9]
Peter Cope raised serious concerns about this approach.
2.4 Cope highlights in his paper that even positive
elements of the teaching are presented in the OFSTED report as
negative: "In music, the emphasis has been placed on enjoyment
rather than raising standards, so that while pupils' enthusiasm
for the subject has rocketed, they are still underachieving."
And Cope argues that the successful encouragement of enjoyment
seems to be disregarded altogether.
CURRENT STATUS
3.1 However, the attitude of OFSTED has now improved
a great deal, with Mark Phillips HMI — a former Advanced
Skills Teacher — ensuring that professional musicians involved
in music education are carefully consulted on, and informed of,
changes in levels, subjects, and grade descriptors.
3.2 The ISM, with a significant membership involved
in music education, was included in recent consultations on OFSTED's
draft subject criteria and our submitted evidence taken on board
and included where possible. We feel that, within the subject
specific consultations, our views are seriously considered and
adopted where appropriate, enhancing music education and the benefits
it can bring to the pupil.
3.3 The continually improving consultative stance
taken by OFSTED in relation to music education is excellent, particularly
when compared to the recent past highlighted above. There is a
real desire to consult with and engage music educators at all
levels. This in turn produces more responsive and trusted guidance.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
THE FUTURE
4.1 We welcome the fact that guidance and levels
from OFSTED are designed to be taken holistically and not taught
rigidly. However, some teachers still feel the need to teach and
mark pupils according to specific OFSTED criteria. OFSTED have
made it clear this is not intended, so what is needed now is very
clear communication by OFSTED as a whole — beyond what is
possible in individual inspections — of the aims and intended
use of all guidance.
4.2 OFSTED would be a particularly effective
body through which incorrect attitudes of head teachers could
be challenged. In particular, two harmful attitudes have been
displayed: The assumption that attainment should always follow
a linear relationship over time and result in continual improvement
and the sometimes harmful practice of requiring teachers to focus
on specific criteria where a more holistic approach would be helpful.
4.3 Finally, whilst it may not be possible for
the creation of guidance to start from a blank slate, nevertheless,
the involvement of music educators and academics at every stage
of development should be the norm.
CONCLUSION
5.1 We welcome the direction OFSTED is moving
in and look forward to continuing our work together to improve
teaching and learning and ensure that music educators are consulted
at every stage of the development of guidance and criteria. We
are particularly pleased that the negative attitudes of the past
seem to have been left behind.
October 2010
8 Inspection Report No. 199478, OFSTED, 2001. Back
9
OFSTED, fun, and learning: a case study of a school music inspection,
Peter Cope, British Journal of Music Education (2003), 20:3:307-315
Cambridge University Press
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=185109
Back
| 
