Recommendations for the assessment of music at Key Stage 3 now accompany the revised National Curriculum for both England and Wales. Although some of the material may be helpful to teachers, certain underlying assumptions compromise valid and reliable assessment. Weaknesses arise from initial confusion when formulating attainment targets, the vagueness and ambiguity of music curriculum wording and reliance on End of Key Stage Descriptions for assessing the work of pupils throughout the whole key stage, causing elements of complexity and range to be inappropriately introduced at each assessment point. This article offers an alternative model that puts the assessment of musical quality first and defers the assessment of musical complexity and range of styles until there are pupil profiles later in the key stage.

Music is supremely a manifestation of thought and perceptual judgement. Yet – and in spite of the good intentions of the National Curriculum - because the importance of these qualities is not generally acknowledged, musical education is in danger of being marginalized. Drawing on the work of W.E. Johnson and F.N. Sibley in logic and aesthetics, the author formulates a hierarchy of musical perception corresponding to Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of basic human needs and suggests that the future status of musical education could depend upon the extent to which teaching can be focused at a level of perception where musk as thought is most evident.

The 1995 Music National Curriculum orders represent a significant change from the Interim Report of 1990 in which the Music Working Group presented its findings and made recommendations to the Secretary of State for Education for a new curriculum. This article explores developments which have led from the original recommendations to the 1995 Curriculum. As it now stands, the curriculum does not develop children's musical skills and understanding in a systematic way. This is not helpful, even to the music specialist, but also it gives rise to another problem. At Key Stages 1 and 2, where there is possibly no music specialist to interpret it, and where generalist class teachers have traditionally felt ill-equipped to teach music, the 1995 curriculum – because it does not prescribe the work to be done in a systematic and developmental way – fails to make clear the achievements expected at the various levels. Therefore, it does nothing to persuade primary teachers that they can contribute usefully to the skill- and knowledge-development which is essential if children are to move systematically through their musical education. Indeed, the Programmes of Study are so lacking in any sense of development or skill-building that they are exactly the same for each of the first three Key Stages. This study looks at the causes of these difficulties and proposes an original scheme of work to address the problem of teacher confidence at Key Stage 1.

Although there are many choices for teachers who are considering music technology in the classroom, care has to be taken not to be swayed by novelty value alone. What is required is software that can be linked directly to children's maturation as composers and instruments that make use of their existing playing skills. Sometimes it is difficult to make the right decision, as user friendliness can outweigh the educational value for the pupils. By looking at all that is available a more informed decision can be taken when purchases are made. This new dimension to music education offers an opportunity to reassess music learning and how thinking and working in groups can be developed in the music lesson.

In this article consideration is given to some of the issues raised in Malcolm Ross's provocative critique of music education and music educators (TJJME, 1995, 12, 185–201). Ross's claim that there is empirical evidence to support a view of school music as a failing arts subject requires closer examination and critical evaluation. Whilst his contention that the arts subjects cannot really be taught in schools is both interesting and challenging, teachers will question some of Ross's underlying pedagogical and aesthetic arguments. They are also likely to conclude that he pays insufficient attention to the many developments that have taken place in the theory and practice of music education.

This article reports the second stage of a project investigating the impact of IT, generally stereotyped as a masculine area of competence, in music education. The project examined differences between boys' and girls' use of music technology and their attitudes towards it. The second stage focused, in particular, upon the effects of school type, since previous research had suggested that girls in single sex schools are more likely to fare better than their counterparts in coeducational schools in areas of the curriculum stereotyped as masculine. The results of a study of 1115 pupils (661 11–12 year olds and 454 15–16 year olds) from eleven secondary schools (four girls', three boys' and four coeducational) in Leicestershire, Birmingham and Coventry are reported here. The most noteworthy findings came from pupils' ratings of their own abilities in relation to same-sex and opposite-sex peers. These ratings were lower in older girls from co-educational schools, indicating a particular lack of confidence within that group. Qualitative data from pupil and teacher interviews is used to examine explanations for this finding and its educational implications.

How do we channel teenagers' interest in music? What guides our music teaching today, and what possibilities are there for development and change? These questions have given me occasion to take a closer look at the situation of music teaching today.

Many teachers have asked themselves how we in the comprehensive school and the music school can look after the zest and creative power which are often exhibited by teenagers when they perform music freely, not under the direct control of a teacher. I have also, on quite a number of occasions during lessons, registered resignation and tedium on the part of pupils.

The consequence has been drop-out from music school – sometimes experienced as a relief both by teacher and pupil. Despite the fact that the educational orientation has been based on a ‘musical encounter’ between teacher and pupil, this encounter has not occurred (or has sometimes occurred with a difference which certainly might have been corrected). But the pupil's great interest in music has not diminished – great interest, that is, in music as the pupil understands the term!

This article discusses the results of a nation-wide survey of the extent to which A-level music is valued as a preparation for higher education and for employment in the music industry. The survey was carried out with music lecturers in higher education, personnel in the music industry, and present A-level and undergraduate music students. The investigation revealed a mismatch between what is looked for in a music education at A-level and what is being studied and achieved at this stage. This raises questions about the core of A-level music in relation to our changing social, cultural, economic and educational climate.

In recent times the types of teaching and learning strategies adopted within higher education in British music conservatoires have been reviewed and reformed. This paper provides a case study of some of the newer practices adopted by one such institution, the Guildhall School of Music and Drama. It focuses on the work of the Performance and Communication Skills Department, and, drawing on participant observations, makes a detailed analysis of the success of the implementation of the teaching and learning aims and objectives. The findings suggest that, not only are the changes adopted by the conservatoire useful, but also that they are beneficial to teachers and students at a number of levels.

Between 1922 and 1941 Walford Davies linked music in schools with the relatively new media of the gramophone and the radio. His work with the BBC and the Gramophone Company had immense potential. He believed strongly that teachers using the radio and gramophone could contribute to a significant improvement in the musical life of the nation. At the heart ofDavies's educational mission was a belief in the ability of children to compose their own melodies, Davies achieved a high public profile for his work, but was less successful in developing its detail. His teaching method became predictable, and style triumphed over substance. However, it may be more productive to view his work within the context of his notion of fellowship, recovering a sense of community in the arts through the mass media, an attempt to connect different musical worlds.

Do high levels of resourcing improve pupils' attainment across any or all areas of the music curriculum; and do pupils make greater progress in their learning where there are significant levels of music technology resourcing? Are there specific outcomes for teachers in terms of teaching styles, INSET, and finance; and what are the most useful items of music technology in the modem classroom? Perceptions of these issues suggest positive developments in key areas, with clear implications for teachers and managers of schools.

Examination criteria, as distinct from guidelines regulating content and presentation, are problematic as applied to musical performance. Given the epistemological gap between musical and conceptual thought, forms of words are not readily available to distinguish objectively between the good and the mediocre performance. Criteria need therefore to be designed to complement the examiner's subjective response rather than substitute for it, and analytical concepts prove to be less reliable than ‘aesthetic terms’ (Sibley). In the context of Western art-music, the ‘good’ musical performance will be one that proposes its own ‘possible world’ (Bruner), situated within the larger ‘world’ of culturally contingent aesthetic values. Aesthetic terms provide the best means we have of access to the experiential world of performed music.

This paper reviews the traditions of teaching school music in Russia and focuses on the music curriculum for comprehensive schools elaborated by the Russian Academy of Pedagogical Sciences. New teaching methods continue to be developed and, despite economic difficulties in Russia, the number of institutes of higher music education remains high compared to that in other countries. As a result Russia has, perhaps, a greater number of highly-qualified musicians, teachers and performers than any other country in the world.