Each review will be 400-600 words in length, demonstrate critical thinking, and show evidence of the app

 

Each review will be 400-600 words in length, demonstrate critical thinking, and show evidence of the application of course content and terminology.  The review will focus on and describe the student’s informed opinion in four areas:

      1. Performers (This should be one of the shortest parts of the review)
      2. Context (This should also be a short part of the review)
      3. Music Description / Planes of Listening (This should be the largest part of the review)
      4. Writers Opinion, including the reviewer’s personal reaction to the concert experience (This should be a substantial part of the review)

Concert reviews will utilize complete sentences, proper organization, correct grammar, and accurate spelling. Each concert review is worth 100 points (10 percent of your final grade), so be sure to submit quality work. 

Please review the content in the Concert Reviews Module for more information about Concert Reviews.

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOjHhS5MtvA

MUSC 2101 Concert Reviews

1. Overview a. List all musicians who performed (if it is a group, you do not have to list

individual musicians). Please remember to list all performers, not just the

soloist(s)

b. Where did the concert take place?

c. When did the concert take place?

d. Why did this concert take place? Was it part of a tour? Was it for educational

purposes? Was it a part of a larger concert season? etc…

2. Elements of Music a. List any/all instruments being played during this concert (including voice)

b. What type of music was being performed?

c. What kind of ensemble was on stage? Solo? Duet? Trio? Quartet? Etc…

d. Describe the music being performed using terminology we have discussed in

class.

3. Your opinion of the concert a. What piece(s) did you like? Why?

b. What piece(s) did you not you like? Why?

c. Would you go again? Why/Why not?

Concert Review Rubric

By the appropriate deadlines (see Course Syllabus) turn in Concert Reviews which will

be graded using the following rubric.

C ri

te ri

a

Unacceptable

0 Points

Needs Improvement

5

Acceptable

7 Points

Good

9 Points

Excellent

10 Points

1

P e

rf o

rm e

rs

Does not reference soloist

or ensemble

References both soloist,

conductor and/or

ensemble specifically but

provides no name

References both

soloist, conductor and/or

ensemble specifically but

provides name of only one

Includes name of soloist,

conductor or ensemble but

not both

Includes names of all

soloists, conductor(s)

and ensembles

2

C o

n te

x t

Provides no context for the

performance

Provides little context for

the performance

Provides some context for

the performance

Provides good context for

the performance

Provides clear context

for the performance

including time, place

and reason for concert

3

M u

si c

D e

sc ri

p ti

o n

The text contains no

musical description.

The text contains limited

facts and examples related

to the topic. The text may

fail to offer a conclusion.

The text provides facts,

definitions, details,

quotations, and examples

that attempt to develop and

explain the topic. The

conclusion merely restates

the development.

The text provides

relevant facts,

definitions, concrete

details, quotations, and

examples that develop

and explain the topic.

The conclusion ties to

and supports the

information/explanation.

The text provides

significant facts,

definitions, concrete

details, and examples

that fully develop and

explain the topic. The

conclusion provides

insight to the

implications, explains

the significance of the

topic, and projects to the

future, etc.

4 W ri

te r’

s O

p in

io n

The text does not contain a

writer's opinion.

The text contains an

unclear opinion that

suggests a vague position.

The text attempts a

structure

and organization to

support the position.

The text introduces a an

opinion but may not be

supported by evidence of

descriptions.

The text has a

structure and organization

that is aligned with the

claim.

The text introduces an

opinion that is clearly

arguable and takes an

identifiable position on the

performance. The text has

an effective structure and

organization that is aligned

with the claim.

The text introduces a

compelling opinion that

is clearly arguable and

takes a purposeful

position on the

performance. The report

has a structure and

organization that is

carefully crafted to

support the opinion.

5

Le n

g th

The text is

significantly less than

400 words.

The text is significantly more

than 600 words.

The text is a little

less than 400 words.

The text is a little more than

600 words.

The text is between

400 and 600 words in

length.

6

S tr

u ct

u re

The text has no identifiable

structure.

The text has limited

structure which does not

facilitate communication

and comprehension.

The text has an emerging

formal structure which

attempts to facilitate

communication and

comprehension.

The text has a clear

structure which facilitates

communication and

comprehension.

The text has an excellent

formal structure which

facilitates

communication and

comprehension.

7

W ri

ti n

g M

e ch

a n

ic s

Text is unreadable due to

multiple inaccuracies in

Standard English

conventions of usage and

mechanics.

Text contains numerous

grammatical, spelling or

punctuation errors. The

style of writing does not

facilitate effective

communication.

Text includes some

grammatical, spelling or

punctuation errors that

distract the reader.

Text is largely free of

grammatical, spelling or

punctuation errors. The

style of writing

generally facilitates

communication.

Text is free of

grammatical, spelling

or punctuation errors.

The style of writing

facilitates

communication.

8

A p

p ro

p ri

a te

u se

o f

th re

e p

la n

e s

o f

li st

e n

in g

.

Does not utilize the three

planes of listening in the

review.

Text fails to demonstrates

a basic understanding of

the different planes of

listening. The review does

not contain elements from

all three planes of

listening.

Text demonstrates a basic

understanding of the

different planes of

listening. The review does

not contain elements from

all three planes of

listening.

Text demonstrates a clear

understanding of the

different planes of

listening. The review

contains elements from all

three planes, but particular

focus is not given to the

musical plane.

Text demonstrates a

clear understanding of

the different planes of

listening. The review

contains elements from

all three planes, but

particular focus is given

to the musical plane.

9

U se

o f

C o

u rs

e T

e rm

in o

lo g

y

a n

d A

p p

ro p

ri a

te W

ri ti

n g

S ty

le

Text fails to use an

appropriate vocabulary

or tone.

The text illustrates a

limited or

inconsistent tone and

awareness of topic-

specific vocabulary.

The text illustrates an

emerging awareness of

formal tone and topic-

specific vocabulary.

The text presents a formal,

objective tone and uses

precise language and topic-

specific vocabulary to

manage the complexity of

the topic.

The text presents an

engaging, formal, and

objective tone and uses

sophisticated language

and topic- specific

vocabulary to manage

the complexity of the

topic.

10

S e

lf ie

a n

d /o

r

Selfie and scan of

program not included

Scan of selfie OR program

included but not both

Selfie and scan of

program included

MUSC 2101– Music Appreciation

Concert Reviews