The Twelve-Minute Program That Ran to Fifteen
A Year 12 student has prepared a solo program of three works: a Baroque slow movement (3:10), a Romantic character piece (4:45), and a contemporary Australian work (3:30). At the trial performance the program ran 14:40. The student's teacher timed the gaps: 40 seconds of retuning between works 1 and 2, 25 seconds of silence while adjusting the music stand, and 35 seconds of walking on and off. The assessment panel allows a maximum of 12:00 of performed music but times the whole appearance from the moment the student enters the stage until they leave it. The student argues the extra time is 'not music' and should be excluded. The contemporary work has an optional repeated section lasting 50 seconds that the student has always played.
1. Calculate whether the student's program fits the panel's rule and identify the single most effective change.
Read the worked answer
The performed music totals 3:10 + 4:45 + 3:30 = 11:25, which is within 12:00. But the panel times the whole appearance, so add the transition time: 40 + 25 + 35 = 100 seconds, or 1:40. Total appearance = 11:25 + 1:40 = 13:05, which exceeds 12:00 by 65 seconds.
The student's claim that gaps are 'not music' is wrong under this rule. The panel is assessing a performance event, and stagecraft is part of it. The most effective single change is to cut the optional repeat in the contemporary work (50 seconds). That brings performed music to 10:35 and the whole appearance to 12:15 - still 15 seconds over. So the repeat alone is not enough; the student must also reduce transition time. Rehearsing a quick retune (or tuning silently before entering) and pre-setting the stand could recover 40–50 seconds, bringing the total under 12:00. The judgement the question tests is that you must address both the music and the stagecraft, and that a single fix may not be sufficient.
2. The student wants to keep the repeat because 'it shows more of the piece'. How should the teacher respond, and what does this reveal about program planning?
Read the worked answer
The teacher should reframe the repeat as a cost, not a bonus. Every second in a timed program is budgeted; the repeat buys 50 seconds of already-heard material at the price of either a cut elsewhere or a rushed transition. The panel rewards contrast and completeness within the limit, not repetition.
A defensible response: the repeat is musically justified only if it adds something the first playing did not - for example, a dynamic or timbral change that reveals structure. If the student cannot articulate that difference in one sentence, the repeat is decoration. Program planning is therefore an exercise in trade-offs: the student should list each work's duration, each transition, and a contingency margin (say 30 seconds), then decide what earns its place. This also builds the reflective habit the course rewards - justifying inclusions by musical effect rather than habit.