Choosing Repertoire That Fits the Assessment, Not the Student's Ego
A drummer must choose a 6-minute program for a contemporary performance assessment. He has two candidates. Piece A is a technically demanding funk track with a complex linear groove, a 16-bar solo, and a tempo of 108 bpm; he can play it at 95% accuracy in practice but has never performed it in front of anyone. Piece B is a rock ballad with a simpler groove, a dynamic build, and a 4-bar fill he has performed at two school concerts. The assessment criteria reward technical demand, stylistic understanding, and performance accuracy. The student wants to choose Piece A because "it shows what I can do".
1. Evaluate the two repertoire choices against the assessment criteria and recommend one, justifying the recommendation.
Read the worked answer
The criteria pull in different directions, and the judgement is about weighting risk against reward.
Piece A scores highly on technical demand and, if executed, on stylistic understanding of funk. But 95% accuracy in practice means roughly one error every 20 beats - in a six-minute piece at 108 bpm that is many audible errors, and the 16-bar solo adds unrehearsed improvisation under pressure. It has never been performed, so the student has no evidence of how he behaves under performance stress. The assessor hears the errors, not the intent.
Piece B scores lower on raw technical demand but higher on demonstrable accuracy and stylistic control: a dynamic build is exactly the kind of thing that shows stylistic understanding, and the fill has been performed twice, so it is reliable. Its weakness is that it may not stretch the student enough to reach the top band for technical demand.
The recommendation depends on the student's profile, but the defensible default is Piece A only if the student can raise accuracy in performance conditions before the assessment - i.e. perform it in front of an audience at least twice and record it. If that cannot happen, Piece B is the stronger choice, because a clean, stylistically convincing simpler performance usually outscores a demanding performance riddled with errors.
The student's reason - "it shows what I can do" - is about self-image, not about what the assessor will hear. That distinction is the heart of the judgement.
2. The student insists on Piece A. Describe a preparation plan that manages the risk, and state what evidence would justify abandoning it.
Read the worked answer
If Piece A is chosen, the plan must convert practice accuracy into performance accuracy, because that is where the risk lies.
- Tempo ladder. Practise at 90, 100, then 108 bpm, moving up only when a full run is clean. Record each run; the recordings are the evidence.
- Isolate the failure points. Identify the bars where errors cluster (usually the linear groove transitions and the solo entries) and loop them rather than replaying the whole piece.
- Rehearse the solo as a written solo. A 16-bar improvised solo under pressure is a liability; write a solo with two or three open bars for improvisation. This preserves stylistic credibility while removing the unrehearsed element.
- Perform it in front of people at least twice before the assessment - a class, a concert, a recording session with an audience. Performance conditions are the only valid test.
- Simulate the assessment: full six minutes, no stopping, one take.
Abandon criteria, stated in advance: if, after two public performances, the recorded error rate is still above roughly one audible error per 30 seconds, or if the student cannot complete a clean full run at 108 bpm in simulation, switch to Piece B. Deciding the threshold before the performances prevents the student from rationalising a poor result afterwards.