Education and Assessment Plan
Contents
1. Vision
1.1 Vision on the professional field and professional profile
1.2 Characterization of the program
1.3 Educational and assessment vision
2.2 Didactic modes of education and assessment
3. Quality of education and assessment
3.1 Content
3.2 Coaching
3.3 Assessment
4. Organization of education and assessment
4.1 Education and examination processes
4.2 Roles and responsibilities
4.4 Facilitating in terms of time and finances
5. Expertise
Introduction
This is the education and assessment plan of Jazz & Pop Arnhem. It describes our vision and principles with respect to education, assessment and examination and outlines the assessment schedule, the modes of teaching and examination and key assessment moments in the curriculum.
This document is intended both as an internal and external accountability instrument and as a means for quality assurance with respect to student education and assessment.
The text refers to documents available on the Electronic Learning Environment (ELE), including the course schedule and detailed module descriptions. The text in this document is a further explanation of the content of the EER (Education and Examination Regulation). The EER is yearly updated and in case of contradiction with the text is this Education and Assessment plan the articles in the EER are always leading.
All Jazz & Pop Arnhem specific choices made concerning this plan are in line with ArtEZ’ educational principles.
This education and assessment plan is drawn up as a source of information for students, staff members, examiners, education committee and all others, interested in our program.
1. Vision
This chapter describes our vision on education and the assessment of study competencies. The below described vision forms the basis of all choices made in the development of our program and is, therefore, in line with documents such as our multi-year plan or the description of our program on the ArtEZ website and other internal as well as external sources of information concerning Jazz & Pop Arnhem.
1.1 Vision on the professional field and professional profile
In the nowadays world of music, the boundaries between music styles are blurred and constantly changing. Crossover between the styles lead to inspiration for new types of music and artists of different disciplines collaborate more and more. Dancers, visual artists, actors, writers and musicians produce works within their own field and increasingly while cooperating with each other. Jazz & Pop musicians need to have an attitude which goes well with this way of working. They should be curious and resilient to be able to determine for themselves to focus on their own art or to look for ways to find other artists to work with. Musicians are challenged to conduct not only the tasks, traditionally connected to them (mainly: craftsmanship as a musician in a broad sense) but additionally to create art in a cross-disciplinary world. On top of that an enterprising attitude is essential to make it happen; this is a world for pushing, active and assertive musicians.
Musicians work in a national as well as an international scene. Music is an international language which enables musicians to play a connecting role in the international society, but this can only be substantial if the musician is also rooted in smaller scenes and help the cohesion in local communities.
Ultimately, the professional practice contains, in almost every case, music education in some form.
Jazz & Pop Arnhem espouses these developments as natural developments for societies and translates these into its program, giving room for students to develop not only their musical craftsmanship, but also their entrepreneurial skills, to expand horizons geographically as well as in terms of arts disciplines and connect to the outside musical and non-musical world.
Dutch National Training profile for Music
To make sure that our education and examination is in accordance with the professional field we use the Dutch National Training Profile for Music 2018 as a basis. We connect to the profile of Musician which covers the artistic, musical/technical and professional/social competencies. Please refer to the appendix of the Education- and Examination Regulation (EER) for an overview of all competencies that are part of this training profile. The competency matrix in this appendix gives a detailed view of which competencies are developed in all modules. The matrix shows that all mentioned competencies are substantially used in the design of the program. This Competencies Matrix, as well as the course schedule and module descriptions are available on the Electronic Learning Environment (ELE).
Our staff members work as professionals in the music world. In meetings concerning developments in our program it is an ongoing discussion whether or not the competencies we use as basis for our program are still appropriate. The same goes for meetings we have with our work-field-committee and of course our students, who give constant feedback on our program. In this way we ensure that after graduating from the Jazz and Pop program our students will succeed as professionals in music.
1.2 Characterization of the program
The ArtEZ Academy of Music in Arnhem focusses on authenticity, individuality, creativity and artistry. The Jazz and Pop program is characterized by the great emphasis on the artistic process, on creativity, on performance. The ambition is to educate students to artistically distinctive musicians. The goal for every student is to develop its own musical personality.
Students have to make many choices as part of their program which stimulates their venturous attitude and their autonomous thinking on their personal development as an artist. This is a core value of our program.
Jazz and Pop Arnhem is an internationally oriented music education program. The program is taught in English which makes it possible for foreign students to follow. As said in paragraph 1.1, music is an international language. Students are encouraged to expand projects abroad or even to spend half a year abroad within the framework of their program.
During the program, students develop the qualities they need as musical performers for their productions and projects. There are many opportunities to develop a personal profile that suits the student’s own talents and ambitions. This freedom is reflected in both artistic development and the elective subjects. Craft skills always form the basis, but artistic entrepreneurship to strengthen the position of the student in the professional field is also an important education goal. Therefore, the program includes –in year one and two– mandatory parts (general entrepreneurship, branding, publicity) and –in years two, three and four– an obligation for every student to at least spend six credits of electives (such as tour management, production management, finances, networking, digital media, copyrights, etc.) in the field of entrepreneurship.
The ArtEZ Academy of Music in Arnhem is part of the art campus, facilitating many multidisciplinary crossovers. The presence, on the one hand, of conservatory courses like Music Theatre and Composition for Film & Theatre and, on the other, non-conservatory programs Dance, Theatre, Fine Art, Creative Writing, and Fashion, serve as a source of inspiration and encourage new types of collaboration, the kind that occur with increasing frequency in professional practice. A good example is: “ChoCo”, a yearly interdisciplinary project, in which composition students Jazz & Pop collaborate with dancers and choreographers of the ArtEZ Academy of Theatre & Dance and the orchestra De ereprijs.
1.3 Educational and assessment vision
Educational vision
In our curriculum, students must be able to develop their personal ambitions and talents from a broad eclectic basis. We aim to present our students with competence based education in a way that guarantees that after 4 years they meet the competence profile of a professional in music.
To achieve this our education is divided into two phases:
First year
Although they have widely different backgrounds, all first-year students follow the same study program. This inspires students to step out of their comfort zone and master a variety of styles, fostering their development into individual musicians. At the end of their first year, students have acquired all the same basic competencies about many aspects of the musical profession and are able to choose their own program during the second, third and fourth years of study.
Main phase
As their study progresses, students are stimulated to take on an increasingly independent role, mainly by giving them more freedom in shaping their personal program, electives and stylistic freedom inclusive. Students study subjects related to their individual ambitions. They can choose from a range of different styles and subjects. Moreover, their extracurricular space allows students to get involved in self-chosen courses or projects, and they are offered the opportunity to collaborate with students from other disciplines, such as dance, theatre, or visual art.
The main subject teacher and study counselor have an important role in the main phase of education. They advise the student in the shaping of their curriculum. There is more detailed information about the electives on the ELE.
We assure that all students learn, in the aggregate, the same competencies during the main phase of education. Please refer to paragraph 2.1 for an explanation on how we manage to do this.
Assessment vision
Assessment and evaluation are important instruments to monitor the students’ level of development and should always match the content and modes of instruction used in the educational setting.
Assessment has two main functions:
- It is an integral part of the students’ learning and development process in terms of formative assessment.
- The second aim of assessments is to determine whether students have acquired the relevant knowledge and skills in their various courses, traineeships and projects. This is known as summative assessment: the level of students is assessed and graded and ECTS credits are awarded.
During the study year, our focus is on formative assessment. In their main subject lessons students are continuously evaluated to monitor their development. The teachers keep track of the development of specific skills, adequate time-keeping and possible circumstances that may obstruct or improve the development of certain competencies. The goal is to keep students motivated and on track. Summative assessment takes place after finishing a module, mostly at the end of a study year. This gives students the opportunity to discover and develop their talents, ambitions and competencies, at their own artistic pace, during the study year.
Professionalism of teaching and assessment
At ArtEZ Jazz & Pop Arnhem we use examiners who are active in the professional field of music and come from the various areas of the prospective professional field of our graduates. Most of our examiners work as performing musicians on a regional or international stage, as session musicians or in backing bands, or employed at music schools or giving master classes to international audiences. In addition, many of our teachers are active as musicians in interdisciplinary projects, sessions and/or musical organizations. We believe that this strong connection to the professional field of music in its full range is one of our most valuable assets. It allows us to safeguard the quality of our teaching and examination and ensures that our locations have a recognizable profile for students.
Ambitions
It’s our ambition to espouse new developments in the professional field of music. To stay up to date we will invest in the new version of the Dutch National Training Profile for Music, evaluate our education and see where improvements can be made.
Our education is a coherent whole of learning activities which altogether prepare the student to work as a musician in the professional field. To make this more transparent we will invest in providing insight with the education and assessment program.
These are only two examples of our ambitions for the coming years. For a full overview of our goals, results and improving action points please refer to our multi-year plan, which can be accessed by DigOport.
2. Didactic concept
2.1 Explanation curriculum
Education program
The Jazz & Pop Arnhem program comprises four study years of 60 ECTS credits each. In order to develop a broad basis of the various aspects of the musical world, all Jazz and Pop students follow the same program during the first year. In line with our educational vision, from the second year on, our students will focus on personal ambitions and independency. The content of the curriculum from year two to four depends on the major subject of the student. There are 19 different majors to choose from. A major can be an instrument, vocals or one of our three programs in composition. For each major an overview of modules and credit determination is available on the ELE. Also, a detailed description of the content, prerequisites, aims, assessment criteria and modes of assessment of each module can be found on the ELE.
Auditions are important parts of our program. These are summative assessments which take place three times throughout the program. On top of that we have a technical exam in all programs, for some main subjects divided into several, increasingly demanding, parts and over several years. The auditions are not to be seen as assessments where all competencies are coherently tested; they have their own set of competencies and criteria. They are, however, the modules in which many competencies connect.
In order to make sure that each student gets comparable education, independent of the main subject, the program consists of three Key Areas:
- Practical
- Theory
- Community
These key areas represent the most notable points of attention in any musical profession. Musicians obviously have playing practices and everything starts there; they play concerts, make applied music, collaborate in interdisciplinary productions and more. In all of these surroundings a vast theoretical knowledge is essential in order to create and communicate with other artists. As described in section 1.1, apart from the artistic development musicians need to establish their professional practice in the community for which business skills as well as a venturous attitude (entrepreneurship) are of vital concern. Besides that, the professional practice contains, in almost every case, music education in some form. This has led to the fact that our program holds obligatory subjects in both the business and educational domain as important parts of the community key area.
To encourage entrepreneurship even more, to develop inquiry potential, responsibility for making its own choices and to develop the skill to create cross-disciplinary music, we give students the freedom to shape a part of their own program. From roughly 25% of the credits in year two up to 50% of the credits in year four, the student chooses electives. A course choice supervisor and the main subject teacher of the student will guide the student in their choice. To guarantee that business and educational skills are sufficiently covered, students must choose at least six credits of electives in both fields, covering these domains.
All Key Areas are present in an approximately fixed ratio in each major. All modules of a major are classified in one or more of the key areas. The different modules in each major all address the same competencies per year as is clarified in the competency matrix in appendix A of the EER which can be found on the ELE. This matrix shows also that each competency is addressed in multiple modules which assures that the content of the training profile for music is fully covered.
Active participation obligations
As a rule, we expect students to attend all classes, as valuable information is shared during lessons and obtaining information from a teacher who is a working musician makes the necessity to learn about specific skills and knowledge tangible. Some subjects, especially where students create together, mention “active participation” as a passing criterion, the student is expected to have been sufficiently present. Rough guideline for this is: a minimum of 80% attendance at classes and where absence could lead to problems for the rest of the group, the assessment will include whether the student has made arrangements so that the group is not duped. In addition, in classes that are not lectures, the student is expected to have actively participated in the class. For some other subjects a minimum class attendance of 80% is an explicit pass criterion. This concerns subjects where training or otherwise learning as a group is essential and/or where the quality of the class will be negatively influenced by an incomplete turn-out. In the education and test program table as well as in the specific module descriptions (there noted under “Pass Requirements”) if attendance plays an explicit role in the assessment.
Assessment program
For each module, a description of the content, prerequisites, aims, assessment criteria and modes of assessment can be found on the ELE. All modules conclude with a summative exam, designed to test whether students have sufficiently understood and mastered the pass criteria of the relevant module, in which case they receive the credits allocated to the module.
Most modules run two semesters, and also include a formative assessment at the end of the first semester.
This formative assessment provides examiners and students with a general idea of the students’ progress and expected development with respect to the final criteria. In addition, we encourage students to keep track of their own development, to reflect regularly on their progress, to take charge and to discuss their development with teachers, fellow students, and if necessary, the study counselor.
Complexity
The complexity of the program is apparent by the relatively large room for electives, which stimulates the development of, among other things, inquiry potential and responsibility, as described above.
To keep the level of education up to standard of NLQF 6 we oblige all teachers to be certified in didactics to teach musicians. On top of that all newly appointed theory teachers need to have a master degree in music. After completing a module at the end of the academic year, they assess the student on the basis of assessment criteria that are geared to the competences from the Dutch National Training Profile for Music 2018. The same learning activities will return in the next academic year, but then at a higher level of content. In this way, students work in four years’ time to the level of a professional musician. The teachers are all prominent musicians and cover a wide stylistic range. Which is an important prerequisite when offering a program that can help all students obtaining a high level of craftsmanship and artistry.
Internationalization
The program is internationally oriented. Many foreign students attend to the program. Specific modules that focus on internationalization are the electives ‘International Band Exchange’ and ‘Abroad’ (an open international mobility window of 30 credits). More information about the content of these modules can be found on the ELE.
2.2 Didactic modes of education and assessment
General overview
The work forms reflect our vision: we give a lot of freedom to experiment in the several classes and coach more than merely instruct students. We use the following education modes:
- Instruction
- Coaching
- Performances
- Lectures
- Instruction
- Lab Class
- Workshop
- Assignment
- Presentation
- Discussion
- Master Class
In the education and assessment program below, in the column “Education Mode”, it is explained which educational mode is used in the specific modules.
More detailed information about the education modes and the key area to which a module belongs (practical, theory or community, see paragraph 2.1) can be found in the module descriptions on the ELE.
Critical Response Process
The ‘Critical Response Process’ is a special module that needs some more clarification. It’s a reflection method specific for artists. It is a method for giving and getting feedback on work in progress, designed to leave the maker eager and motivated to get back to work. This fits exactly to our way of working during the academic year: continuously evaluating the work and performance of the students. With this method, the students learn to respond to the work of a peer in a positive way and receive feedback from others. In this way, it contributes to our ambition to educate students to artistically distinctive musicians and the goal for every student to develop its own musical personality. The method is taught in a specific module but can also be used in other educational settings. Please check out the description of the Critical Response Process module for more detailed information.
Assessment Modes
Our assessment modes follow the educational modes. We use the following assessment modes:
- Formative or summative performance review
- Evaluation
- Audition review
- Portfolio review
- Thesis review
- Written (theory) test
- Oral (skills) test
- Attendance registration
In the education and assessment program below, in the column “Assessment Mode”, it is explained which assessment mode is used for the specific modules.
Below several key assessment modes are explained. Please see the module descriptions for an outline with explanations of all modes of assessment.
Summative Performance review
The main subject modules are taught and assessed through continuous formative evaluation: student and teacher both assess the student’s development during each lesson, which results in a formative, written performance review by the end of the autumn semester as well as a written summative performance review by the end of each spring semester. The results of ongoing evaluations are documented in the students’ files. All assessments are based on an assessment form. At the end of the spring semester the student also gets an evaluation conversation in which the concluding graded is determined for the module ‘Individual class main subject’.
One of the assessment criteria for all main subject modules is ‘public performance’. The student gets the opportunity to preform for an audience several times during the semester. In this way it is guaranteed that students are not only assessed in school settings but also in professional practice.
Audition
At the end of year one, three and four, students demonstrate their development in a so-called audition, which typically takes the form of a brief concert performance where students sing or play their main subject instrument. There is no instruction and the student prepares the audition autonomously. As playing in front of an audience is one of the main activities for all musicians, auditions are among the most important of our curriculum. Students prepare the auditions on their own. Since the auditions involve assessment criteria that are not part of the main subject module, they are included in our curriculum as a separate module instead of a summative exam of the main subject. Students choose an audition program, which allows them to demonstrate their skills in composing or band playing and interaction, improvisation skills, set-list composition and flow, their own ‘sound’, and their personal interpretation and approach to the music. The concert is performed for a panel of three to five examiners. An assessment by three examiners is valid. These are in most cases also public auditions, open to outside visitors.
By the end of the second year all students do a Critical Response Process in the artist’s role. This session replaces the audition which is part of every other year’s program.
Premiere
At the end of the fourth year, we determine whether students meet the end-criteria of their study which are required for graduation. When a student has completed all other modules they can execute their premiere concert. We call this concert a premiere because we see it as an imaginary beginning of the student’s professional world after university. This is a special type of audition, which can only be held once a student has completed all other modules. The premiere allows students to fully demonstrate their musician’s identity and all relevant skills before an assessment committee. They are free to shape their own audition and choose whatever competency is or is not part of this 50 to 60-minute presentation. That the premiere concert being the last, and important, module to pass does not mean it has an all-encompassing character.
3. Quality of education and assessment
3.1 Content
A detailed description of the content, prerequisites, aims, assessment criteria and modes of assessment of each module can be found on the ELE and in the so called info kit.
The content of a module is determined by two main factors:
- The module aims which are based on the competences of the Dutch National Training Profile for Music.
- The professional opinion off the teacher staff, on base of the module aims they decide which learning materials (e.g. study books, recordings, compositions) are necessary to achieve these aims.
3.2 Coaching
Study Information
At the start of the academic year all students get a hard copy timetable with classroom hours and an assessment schedule for the whole year. This provides the student with a clear overview of where and when they are expected to be. If necessary, changes can be made at the start of the academic year.
During the year the students are informed over changes in their timetable over the ArtEZ app.
Besides the ArtEZ app students are informed about study related topics by the teaching staff and organisation staff.
During the academic year students play in different bands with each other. They meet up several times a week, communication between students takes place in a natural way.
Main subject teacher
Approximately 25% of the curriculum consists of the ‘Individual class main subject’. In this module the student gets individual instruction and coaching on their main subject. The students progression is continuously evaluated in conversation between student and main subject teacher. The instruction and coaching is focused on the students needs to achieve the education and training aims to become artistically distinctive musician and to develop a musical personality.
Students usually have one or two main subject teachers. They may optionally choose to have an individual main subject teacher of a subject other than their own. However, there is a restriction to this. This is only possible from year two onwards and until the technical exam is passed at least half of the lessons must be given by a teacher of their own main subject. Changes of this nature always involve close consultation between the student, their main subject teacher(s) and study counselor.
More than one (or two) main subject teachers in a year, i.e. spreading the available time over three teachers, is not promoted at all. If a student does aspire to have more than two main subject teachers this is only possible after careful consultation and will only be accepted in exceptional cases.
Besides a main subject teacher the student also has a ‘course choice supervisor’ and a ‘study counselor’ to guide them through the curriculum.
Course choice supervisor
Approximately 25% in year two up to 50% of the credits in year four are elective modules. The main subject teacher and a course choice supervisor will guide the student in choosing their electives. Besides that the student is stimulated to consult other teachers when seeking advice about specific professional areas.
The course choice supervisor will have an interview with the student discussing all the options a student has. Questions that will be examined in the interview are, for example:
“What are your interests? What are your strong points? Which areas are not yet strongly developed but where you feel it is important to improve them? What are your expectations of your future profession and – bearing this in mind – are there areas that you would like to develop more thoroughly?”
Please refer to the description of the electives on the ELE for more information. Also, there is a section on the info kit, explaining, more in detail, the process of choosing.
Study counselor
If the student has any problems concerning their study progress they can contact the study counselor for help. The study counselor will help to find a solution to keep the student on track.
All exam results are collected in a digital system called Osiris. The student and study counselor can follow the student’s progression via this system.
3.3 Assessment
All modules conclude with a summative exam. Most modules run two semesters and also include a formative test at the end of the first semester. All formative and summative exams are conducted on base of an assessment form. The criteria in this form are geared to the competences from the Dutch National Training Profile for Music. The assessment forms are evaluated on a regularly basis, to assure the quality of the assessment. We believe the following aspects are of key importance, when developing and evaluating assessments and assessment forms, with respect to assessment quality: validity, reliability, usability, objectivity, transparency and realizability.
Validity
The test measures what it intends to measure. This means that the module criteria determine their contents, and that the module contents are reflected in the tests. The assessment forms are the product of collaboration between the main subject sections, coordinators and examiners of the relevant module. Together, the different tests cover all the competencies (see table) students are expected to develop over the course of their study, which represents a reflection of what is asked of professional musicians. In case of a group assignment, for example when a student is preforming in a band, students are always assessed individually as well. In this way it is guaranteed that the assessment is valid for the individual student performance.
Reliability
All tests are created and maintained by the relevant examiner(s). They develop and evaluate assessment forms with clear pass and assessment criteria based on the competences of the Dutch National Training Profile for Music. For oral and written theory exams the examiners develop answer keys which are regularly evaluated.
Usability
The exams are practically workable and feasible for both students and assessors. The usability of the exams is evaluated on a regularly basis with students and examiners.
Objectivity
The most objective form of assessment is examination by a panel of examiners who discuss the performance of a student and determine the concluding grade based on clear criteria. This mode of assessment is the best possible approximation of real music life, where musicians are judged by a variety of audiences and intersubjective assessment is the standard. We use this form as much as possible without compromising on usability, as described above.
Transparency
The educational program as well as assessment process are available for perusal by all parties involved. These are described in the module descriptions and the Education and Assessment Regulations on the ELE. Students can also always refer to their teachers to get more information about the content and procedure of the assessment.
Realizability
All assessments are on a level corresponding to what might be expected from the student in their current study year. The level of examination is slowly rising from NLQF 5 in year 1 to NLQF 6 in year 4 and covering all the competences of the Dutch National Training Profile for Music by the end of year 4.
Assessment procedures
Students are assessed by a panel of examiners or a single examiner. In the education and assessment program below, in the column “Conducted by”, it is indicated if the specific module is examined by a single examiner or a panel.
Single examiner
Some modules are mainly assessed solely by the teacher who provided the lessons. A good example is the ‘Individual class main subject’ module. The main subject teacher has been coaching and instructing the student all year long. The main subject teacher and student have continuously been evaluating the development and progression of the student during the year. The only one who knows exactly what the competences of the student are, how they have developed during the year and what they still have to learn is the main subject teacher. Therefore it’s a logical and valid choice to let this teacher fill in the assessment form and determine the concluding grade.
When a student is assessed by a single examiner, the examiner should always explain their (positive or negative) conclusions on the assessment form. Besides that the examiner should discuss the conclusions with the student before submitting the form to the study progress office.
Panel of examiners
To safeguard the objectivity of our assessment program the modules in which many competencies are connected are assessed by a discussion of a panel of examiners. They base their assessment on an assessment form with an outline of relevant criteria. The average grade will be used as the final grade.
For example, the assessments of the first-year bands and band coaching are formulated during a panel of examiners discussion among all the teachers involved in the module. For the auditions a panel of three to five examiners is always composed, as evenly as possible, from the teachers of different main subjects and professional fields, assuring that students’ performances are assessed from the various perspectives relevant to our professional discipline.
3.4 Quality Assurance
To safeguard the quality of the program we carry out the PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) cycle yearly to evaluate and, where necessary, adjust the program.
Plan
We write down our goals, results and improving action points in a multi-year plan, which can be accessed in DigOport. The content of this plan is based on developments in the professional field; in- and external developments in education insights and demands and evaluation results.
Do
The multi-year plan is broken down in more workable and feasible scheduled actions. Those will be carried out under accountability of the head. The head monitors and records the status of all actions and reports the results in the next step of the PDCA cycle.
Check
All modules are evaluated every few years (digitally as well as in meetings) to check if the goals, mentioned in the first step of the cycle, are reached and students and teachers are satisfied. An important survey is the National Student Survey. The evaluation outcomes of this and the other surveys are registered on DigOport by O&K and shared with –and discussed with– students and staff members.
Besides these evaluations we also check the quality of the program regularly consulting tree different committees: the Course Committee; the Professional Field Advice Committee and the Exam Committee.
Course Committee
This committee consists of teachers and students from ArtEZ Jazz & Pop Arnhem. The committee meets at least twice a year. Yearly recurring topics discussed here are the Teaching and Examination Regulations, the education and assessment program, the outcomes of the NSS and changes in the content or organisation of the program.
Professional field advice committee
This committee consist of experts from the professional field. From the perspective of the professional field the committee advises on the relevance of objectives, the educational program and the content of education, training and organization.
Exam Committee
The exam committee carries out systematic evaluations to monitor the quality of tests and assessment procedures. They visit classrooms both with and without prior notice in order to evaluate the quality of assessments and compliance with the assessment regulations. In addition, they perform random sample testing of student files.
On a regular basis the program’s head discusses all relevant outcomes of the check phase with management and staff of the ArtEZ Conservatorium. Conclusions are drawn and new goals formulated.
Act
Based on the outcomes of the check phase, new points of improvement are determined and carried out. These actions are shared with teachers and students on the ELE and via email.
New far-reaching goals and actions will be assimilated in the multi-year plans.
4. Organization of education and assessment
In this chapter some important education and examination processes are explained in more detail. Also the roles and responsibilities of all staff members involved in these processes are described.
4.1 Education and examination processes
Binding negative study advice (BAS)
As also mentioned in our EER, in the first year of study, the student must obtain at least 45 credits and pass for Music Theory, Main subject (for all wind instruments and strings including ArtEZ Big Collective) and the First Year Audition. If one of these conditions is not met, the student will get a ‘BAS’ (binding negative study advice) which means they can’t continue their study.
There is a specific procedure for the examination of Music Theory: We take a student’s development into account as well as their exam results. The theory exam half-way through the first year is a formative exam and by the end of the first year the exam is summative. In both cases the final grade is calculated as follows: Aural Skills exams AND Harmony exam AND General Music Theory exam are graded each with 5.5 or higher, and in addition, the Aural Skills final marks may contain one partial grade (for melody, harmony or rhythm) lower than 5.5, but not lower than 4.5. At the end of the first year, all theory examiners meet to discuss the first-year students and give individual recommendations.
The recommendation is always positive when the student has passed the summative exam at the end of the first year. The recommendation is always negative when the student has been graded below 4.5.
Students who have been graded under 5.5, but not below 4.5 may get a positive recommendation by the theory examiners based on a checklist of personal aspects. The items on that checklist are class attendance, dealing with homework, learning abilities, working pace, development pace of knowledge and skills, work attitude and involvement in class, demonstrated motivation for the subject theory and the way the student followed up on the advice of the study counsellor, especially after an insufficient formative test in January. The theory examiners draw up a report of their findings.
This recommendation is formulated in consultation with all theory examiners, ensuring that all decisions are made with the utmost care.
Assessment moments
There are two main assessment moments during the year, towards the end of both semesters, where students have most of their exams, in January and May/June/July. These exams may be either formative, i.e., process-focused reflections of students’ development, or summative, where students need to demonstrate their command of a set of criteria. The January exams are, as a rule, taken during the scheduled classes and the other classes during that period will take place as normal. During the weeks in which the exams are taken in May/June/July no lessons will be scheduled and students can solely focus on the exams. If any other activity takes place during an exam period an exam that clashes with the other activity always has precedence over the other activity.
All initial exam opportunities are planned and organized by the Study Progress Office. All second and subsequent opportunities in the following years are planned by the Study Progress Office and organized on request. The composition of panels is approved by the coordinator Music Theory in case of theory subjects and by the head of Jazz & Pop Arnhem in all other cases. All audition reports are seen and signed by the head Jazz & Pop Arnhem before being filed. Written exams should be checked and made available to the students and the Study Progress Office within four working weeks from the exam sitting.
Important examination notices
- Failing to take advantage of an exam opportunity will result in a wasted chance.
- A deadline for submitting a project assignment is also an exam opportunity. A late submission means that an opportunity has been lost and the work submitted will be evaluated as a second opportunity. If a negative assessment is received, it will only be possible to resubmit the assignment the following academic year in accordance with the regular curriculum. This may mean that a student will have to wait half a year, to submit their resit project.
- The exam for each unit must be described in the module descriptions along with the exam matrix below: when the exam will take place, what form the exam will take, how long the exam will take and how much the exam will count towards the final mark. An assessment form and a pass mark for each interim test must also be filed.
- It is possible that students may not show up for the first exam opportunity. It is important for students to realize that if they fail the second opportunity, the Board of Examiners will not grant a third opportunity. Exceptions will be made for absence due to illness or other serious unforeseen circumstances. Illness is a legitimate reason to deregister for an exam, but it does not grant the automatic right to a third exam opportunity. In such cases, the third opportunity must still be formally requested from the Board of Examiners.
- Some students are entitled to additional exam time. It is important that everything is carefully explained to these students by the education management. The student counsellor indicates which students are entitled to additional time. ArtEZ’ general policy and regulations apply here. The regular exam time is extended by 30% for these students. The invigilator/examiner must know which students are entitled to additional time. Factoring an additional half hour into the planning of the exams is standard.
Resits
A student has two examination opportunities (one exam, and one resit) in the academic year in which the relevant module was initially offered. After those two opportunities, the student has one more resit per year in the following academic years. The resit takes precedence over other activities, including other exams. A resit opportunity is, in principle, offered in the next initial resit period, and must be requested by the student. If a student must wait for an exam opportunity in a subsequent year – so after the relevant unit was initially offered in the curriculum – then they must use the first available opportunity in the next initial resit period. Any additional opportunities outside of the regulations as described here are possible with approval from the Board of Examiners in advance only. A valid reason for an additional exam opportunity can be that a student must wait over a year to do a resit, for instance when this means study delay because of prerequisites. In the education and assessment program can be found for which modules prerequisites apply. In the description of the module the specific prerequisites are declared. The module description can be found on the ELE.
Specific periods in which resits take place for students in year one, two, three or four are described in the “Beleidsbesluit tentamenperioden en herkansingen ArtEZ Conservatorium (version April 12, 2016).” Any opportunities outside of the periods described in that document, for instance if the student has a reason to do a resit audition in August, are possible with approval from the Board of Examiners in advance only. Requests for these opportunities can be done using a specific form, available at the Study Progress Office.
For students, who did not graduate in four years, only because they still have to submit one or more assignments, or did not yet do their premiere concert, the following applies:
- Assignments, papers and theses can be submitted any time, but not more than once a year, by enrolled students. ArtEZ Jazz & Pop Arnhem guarantees to have checked and made available the results to the student involved and the Study Progress Office within six working weeks (an oral exam inclusive if applicable) from the submission;
- The enrolled student, who has finished all other parts of the program, can request a premiere concert any time, but not more than once a year. ArtEZ Jazz & Pop Arnhem guarantees to schedule this premiere concert within six working weeks from the request. Such a premiere concert will take place in a classroom and will typically be scheduled during the day.
4.2 Roles and responsibilities
In the table below the roles and responsibilities of all staff members involved in the education and examination process of the Jazz and Pop program are explained.
| Process Steps | Head | Managing Board | Teaching Staff / Examiners | Student | Course committee | Study Progress Office | Professional Field Advice Committee | O&K | Exam Committee |
| Design of this Education & Assessment Plan and Program | AR | I | R | I | C | I | C | C | C |
| Design, development and elaboration of modules, education activities and assessments | AR | I | R | I | C | I | C | I | |
| Design learning outcomes, assessment criterions and subsequent standardization | A | I | R | I | I | I | C | C | I |
| Implementation Education and Assessment | A | R | I | I | R | I | I | ||
| Assessment and justification of this assessment | A | R | I | C | I | I | |||
| Processing the results of assessments, registering in Osiris | AR | R | I | I | R | C | |||
| Communicating assessment results | A | R | I | R | C | ||||
| Evaluating and improving modules and assessments | A | R | C | C | I | C | I | ||
| Evaluation and improvement Education and Assessment program | AR | I | C | R | I | C | C | C | |
| Professionalisation teaching staff and examiners | A | R | I | I | I | I | C | I | |
| A = Accountable, R = Responsible for implementation, C = consulted, I = informed. | |||||||||
4.3 Underlying documents
Below, all relevant resources for our education and examination are mentioned. The documents can be found on ArtEZ Intranet, DigoPort, the Jazz & Pop Electronic Learning Environment and require, in most cases, an account and login authorisation.
4.4 Facilitating in terms of time and finances
All education and assessment activities are mainly payed for by ArtEZ Jazz & Pop Arnhem’s budget, needing an average of 0.08 FTE per student (including, and mainly used for, salaries and, for a small portion, for material, hire, etc). The program’s head is responsible for each year’s budget and guards this boundary. Making the execution of the program possible, additional funding by the conservatory as a whole (some conservatory-broad projects, etc.), ArtEZ as a whole (management costs, ArtEZ-broad projects, etc.), support services (buildings, renovations, etc.) and education office (educational office staff, office supplies, etc.) is available. The faculty’s managing board is, eventually, accountable for both design and execution of the program in terms of finances (including hours spent).
Apart from the hours spent on education teaching staff members are paid additionally for meetings concerning evaluations of the program and professionalisation, such as courses followed or team schooling days.
5. Expertise
The quality of our didactics and assessment is in part determined by the skills of our staff members. Almost all staff members are grade two qualified music teachers at the highest possible level, having graduated at a conservatory. In all job performance reviews, we discuss a teacher’s further options for professional training.
ArtEZ works with a plan for professional development that stimulates professional training among members of our team. In the coming years all teachers who have a workload of 40% or more have to achieve the BDB (Basic Didactic Skills) certificate. Exemptions apply to staff members in the possession of a conservatory grade two diploma; they don’t need to achieve an additional BDB certificate.
All examiners have to achieve the BKE (Basic assessment skills) certificate. Exemptions apply to staff members in the possession of a conservatory grade two diploma; they don’t need to achieve an additional BKE certificate.
Examples of training programs, organized by Jazz & Pop Arnhem, are peer review meetings, where staff members evaluate each other’s assessment skills, or sessions on the so-called Critical Response Process, where a group of responders give feedback on an artistic presentation.
Education and Assessment Program
Year One | |||||||||||
| General | |||||||||||
| Study module | Osiris-code | EC | Education Mode | Hour distribution | Sequentiality | Class Attendance | Assessment Mode | Moment of assessment | Conducted by | Weight | Assessment resit period |
| Individual Class Main Subject | M-JP-XXX1 | 11-17 (*1) | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 25 Selfstudy variable | No | Formative performance review Evaluation | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review Evaluation | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Guest Teachers | M-JP-GST1 | 1 | Workshop Master Class Lab Class | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Project Weeks | M-JP-PRW1 | 2-5 (*1) | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 50 or more Selfstudy 6 or more | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| First Year Band | M-JP-ENS | 7 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 65 Selfstudy 131 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Evaluation Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiners | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Evaluation | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| First Year Audition | M-JP-AUD1 | 1 | Performance | Facetime 1 Selfstudy 27 | No | 100% | Audition performance review | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*2) | 100% (*3) | See Resits |
| Music Production | M-JP-MPR | 2 | Lectures Instruction Lab Class Workshop Assignment Presentation Discussion | Facetime 15 Selfstudy 41 | No | Performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |
| Tilt Band | M-JP-TLT1 | 5 | Lectures Instruction Lab Class | Facetime 25 Selfstudy 115 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Music Theory | M-JP-THE1 | 8 | Lectures Instruction Lab Class Assignment | Facetime 100 Selfstudy 124 | No | Formative written and oral test | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative written and oral test | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Harmony at the Piano | M-JP-HAP1 | 4 | Lectures Instruction Assignment | Facetime 40 Selfstudy 72 | No | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Rhythm Lab | M-JP-RPR1 | 3 | Lectures Instruction Lab Class | Facetime 20 Selfstudy 64 | No | Formative written and oral test | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative written and oral test | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Education | M-JP-EDU | 3 | Lectures Instruction Workshop Assignment Presentation Discussion | Facetime 38 Selfstudy 46 | No | Active participation (*6) | Written test Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits |
| Music History | M-JP-MGS | 2 | Lectures Assignment Presentation Discussion | Facetime 40 Selfstudy 16 | No | Summative written test Evaluation | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |
| First Year Meetings | M-JP-STU1 | 2 | Lectures Instruction Workshop Assignment Presentation Discussion | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment periods January and June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits |
| Interdisciplinary Project | M-JP-IPR1 | 2 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 28 Selfstudy 28 | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Start Project Week | M-JP-STPRWK | 1 | Instruction Coaching Performances | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Specific Main Subjects | |||||||||||
| Supplementary Technique Class (Vocals) | M-JP-VOC1 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 13 Selfstudy 99 | No | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Group Class Main Subject (Accordion, Bass Guitar, Cello, Double Bass, Drums, Guitar, Piano & Keys, Viola, Violin) | M-JP-GLSXXX1 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 30 Selfstudy 82 | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner tracks attendance | 0% | See Resits |
| Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | ||||||||
| ArtEZ Big Collective (Clarinet, Flute, Saxophone, Strings, Trombone & Trumpet) | M-JP-ABC1 | 6 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 60 Selfstudy 108 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiners | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Vocal Ensemble (Vocals) | M-JP-VEN | 5 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 45 Selfstudy 95 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Duo Class (Vocals) | M-JP-DLS1 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 33 Selfstudy 79 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Vocal Accompaniment (Piano & Keys) | M-JP-DLS1 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 33 Selfstudy 79 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
Year Two | |||||||||||
| General | |||||||||||
| Study module | Osiris-code | EC | Education Mode | Hour distribution | Sequentiality | Class Attendance | Assessment Mode | Moment of assessment | Conducted by | Weight | Assessment resit period |
| Individual Class Main Subject (A Technical Exam inclusive for Bass Guitar, Trombone & Voice) | M-JP-XXX2 | 9-17 (*1) | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 25 Selfstudy variable | Yes, completion of M-JP-XXX1 is a prerequisite | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiner | 50 or 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Audition review (see left) | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*4) | 50% or n/a | See Resits | |||||||
| Guest Teachers | M-JP-GST2 | 1 | Workshop Master Class Lab Class | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Project weeks | M-JP-PRW2 | 2-5 (*1) | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 50 or more Selfstudy 6 or more | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Elective Band | M-JP-KEN | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 32 Selfstudy 79 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Critical Response Process | M-JP-CRP | 1 | Performance Response Session | Facetime 2 Selfstudy 26 | No | 100% | Evaluation Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Facilitator tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Music Theory | M-JP-THE2 | 6-9 (*1) | Lectures Instruction Lab Class Assignment | Facetime 105 Selfstudy 147 | Yes, completion of M-JP-THE1 is a prerequisite | Formative written and oral test | Assessment period January | Examiner | 100% | n/a | |
| Summative written and oral test | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Harmony at the Piano | M-JP-HAP2 | 4 | Lectures Instruction Assignment | Facetime 40 Selfstudy 72 | Yes, completion of M-JP-HAP1 is a prerequisite | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Methodology | M-JP-MTHXXX | 2-3 (*1) | Lectures Instruction Assignment Presentation Discussion | Facetime 13-26 Selfstudy 43-58 | No | Active participation (*6) | Written examination Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits |
| Second Year Meetings | M-JP-STU2 | 2 | Lectures Instruction Workshop Assignment Presentation Discussion | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Performance review Attendance registration | Assessment periods January and June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits |
| Entrepreneurship | M-JP-ENT | 2 | Lectures Instruction Assignment Presentation Discussion | Facetime 24 Selfstudy 32 | No | Paper review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |
| Electives | M-JP-KEU | 10-15 (*1) | variable | variable | No | Varies per elective, see the descriptions | |||||
| Specific Main Subjects | |||||||||||
| Supplementary Technique Class (Vocals) | M-JP-VOC2 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 13 Selfstudy 99 | Yes, completion of M-JP-VOC1 is a prerequisite | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Group Class Main Subject (Accordion, Bass Guitar, Cello, Double Bass, Drums, Guitar, Piano & Keys, Viola, Violin) | M-JP-GLSXXX2 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 30 Selfstudy 82 | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner tracks attendance | 0% | See Resits |
| Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | ||||||||
| ArtEZ Big Collective (Clarinet, Flute, Saxophone, Strings, Trombone & Trumpet) | M-JP-ABC2 | 6 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 60 Selfstudy 108 | Yes, completion of M-JP-ABC1 is a prerequisite | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiners | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Tilt Vocals (Vocals) | M-JP-TLTZ1 | 5 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 25 Selfstudy 87 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiners | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Vocal Accompaniment (Piano & Keys) | M-JP-DLS2 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 33 Selfstudy 79 | No | Active participation (*6) | Performance review Attendance registration | Assessment periods January and June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits |
Year Three | |||||||||||
| General | |||||||||||
| Study module | Osiris-code | EC | Education Mode | Hour distribution | Sequentiality | Class Attendance | Assessment Mode | Moment of assessment | Conducted by | Weight | Assessment resit period |
| Individual Class Main Subject (A Technical Exam inclusive for Accordion, Cello, Clarinet, Double Bass, Flute, Guitar, Latin Percussion, Piano & Keys, Saxophone, Trombone, Trumpet, Viola & Violin) | M-JP-XXX3 | 11-17 (*1) | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 25 Selfstudy variable | Yes, completion of M-JP-XXX2 is a prerequisite | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiner | 50 or 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Audition (see left) | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*4) | 50% or n/a | See Resits | |||||||
| Guest Teachers | M-JP-GST3 | 1 | Workshop Master Class Lab Class | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Band Coaching | M-JP-BND1 | 8 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 38 Selfstudy 186 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Audition | M-JP-AUD3 | 1 | Performance | Facetime 1 Selfstudy 27 | No | 100% | Audition performance review | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*2) | 100% (*3) | See Resits |
| Research | M-JP-OVV | 6 | Lectures Instruction Assignment Discussion | Facetime 10 Selfstudy 158 | No | Thesis review | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*5) | 50% (*3) | See Resits | |
| Oral test | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*5) | 50% (*3) | See Resits | |||||||
| Electives | M-JP-KEU | 16 - 27 (*1) | variable | variable | variable | Varies per elective, see the descriptions | |||||
| Specific Main Subjects | |||||||||||
| ArtEZ Big Collective (Clarinet, Flute, Saxophone, Strings, Trombone & Trumpet) | M-JP-ABC3 | 6 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 60 Selfstudy 108 | Yes, completion of M-JP-ABC2 is a prerequisite | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Duo Class (Vocals) | M-JP-DLS2 | 4 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 33 Selfstudy 79 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
Year Four | |||||||||||
| General | |||||||||||
| Study module | Osiris-code | EC | Education Mode | Hour distribution | Sequentiality | Class Attendance | Assessment Mode | Moment of assessment | Conducted by | Weight | Assessment resit period |
| Individual Class Main Subject (A Technical Exam inclusive for Drums) | M-JP-XXX4 | 17 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 25 Selfstudy variable | Yes, completion of M-JP-XXX3 is a prerequisite | Formative performance review | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a | |
| Summative performance review | Assessment period June | Examiner | 50 or 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Audition (see left) | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*4) | 50% or n/a | See Resits | |||||||
| Guest Teachers | M-JP-GST4 | 1 | Workshop Master Class Lab Class | variable | No | Active participation (*6) | Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner tracks attendance | 100% | See Resits |
| Band Coaching | M-JP-BND2 | 8 | Instruction Coaching Performances | Facetime 38 Selfstudy 186 | No | Active participation (*6) | Formative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period January | Examiner | 0% | n/a |
| Summative performance review Attendance registration | Assessment period June | Examiner | 100% | See Resits | |||||||
| Premiere | M-JP-AUD4 | 1 | Performance | Facetime 1 Selfstudy 27 | No | 100% | Audition performance review | Assessment period June | Panel of examiners (*2) | 100% (*3) | See Resits |
| Electives | M-JP-KEU | 18 -33 (*1) | variable | variable | variable | Varies per elective, see the descriptions | |||||
| Specific Main Subjects | |||||||||||
| XXX needs to be replaced by the applicable instrument code: ACC BAS CEL CLA COM CBS DRM FLU GIT PRC PIA SAX TRB TRP VLA VIO VOC | |||||||||||
| *1: depends on main subject; see the programs per main subject | |||||||||||
| *2: panel of examiners with three to five teachers with at least two main subject examiners | |||||||||||
| *3: average of grades awarded by panel of examiners members | |||||||||||
| *4: panel of examiners with at least two main subject examiners | |||||||||||
| *5: panel of examiners consisting of the thesis supervisor, second reader and a chair | |||||||||||
| *6: see above under 2.1 "Active participation obligations" | |||||||||||