Does pop belong in ABRSM exams?

The case for a different approach

A short answer is “yes, but…”

Here’s an in-depth answer:

---

PianoDao reviews are always insightful and thought-provoking, and the recent review of the ABRSM exam syllabus for 2025-26 was no different. It’s a long article but worth reading. The section that particularly caught my eye was the critical discussion of the song arrangements included in the syllabus. Reviewer Andrew Eales draws attention to arrangements where the rhythm of the original has been changed significantly, and asks the crucial question:

if an exam candidate plays these songs with the rhythm of the original recordings, rather than the sometimes adapted, quantised versions on offer, will they receive more marks, or in fact fewer?

To put it more provocatively, if an exam candidate corrects an arrangement that is wrong, will they be rewarded or penalised?

This is a crucial question for each candidate, who will naturally want to maximise their marks, but it also illustrates a much broader problem.

The longest running exam boards were set up to assess classical performance, but as times have changed, they have tried to include more contemporary music in their syllabuses. That’s well-intentioned and overall beneficial, but it certainly throws up problems. Here’s one big problem:

The way in which we assess classical* and pop* music should be different.

Classical* and pop* music work differently, so we must assess them differently.

In pop music, unlike in classical music, the score is not the primary source. The primary source is typically a recording. Indeed, most pop sheet music was not written by the composer themselves, but an arranger. Moreoever, pop artists often improvise when they perform (particularly with vocal rhythm, which can be wonderfully flexible) and they frequently rework their pieces for different instrumentations. These last two points were also true of many classical composers—Bach and Chopin are notable examples—but these composers generally left us a personally written score or scores that we use as our primary source.

Everyone who has tried writing arrangements of songs knows that it is difficult to capture the fascinating rhythmic complexity of a good pop song, and particularly to notate them in a way that is accessibile to an elementary student. As a result, anyone who has taught elementary arrangements of songs has learnt to expect students to say “it doesn’t really sound quite like that”. (In 99% of instances when I teach students to play pop arrangements, we make some change to the sheet music to bring it closer to the original. I did exactly that in a lesson just now, with an arrangement of Voulez-Vous by ABBA which hadn’t quite captured the bassline correctly.)

But for most exam boards, accuracy to the given score is an important part of the mark scheme. That makes sense. The exam system was set up with classical music in mind, and for most classical music, the score is our primary source. We might have recordings of Bartók playing some pieces from For Children, but we certainly don’t have recordings of Schumann playing selections from Album für die Jugend. Moreover, unlike pop artists, sheet music was the primary way that many classical composers distributed their music. Haydn’s successful trips to London were made possible by the popularity of his sheet music. Considering that Haydn’s 1971 journey to London took more than a fortnight—a tad slower than Taylor Swift’s airplane—you can understand why he initially relied on scores rather than performances to establish himself on the London scene!

*A note on terminology: for convenience I’ve used umbrella terms like “pop” and “classical” here to make my argument. It is of course nowhere near as simple as that: these are not two monolithic opposites. Being more precise, this is a question of how we judge and react to what the original artist intended. For much contemporary music, the recording is key. For much classical music, the score is key. (I’ve not even touched on the complexity of assessing jazz!)

That’s the problem. What’s the solution?

Exam boards who choose to include pop music in their syllabuses should:

1. ensure that their examiners are familiar with the original recordings of all the pop pieces in their syllabuses

2. encourage students to listen to the original recordings (plaudits to ABRSM for doing this in the Teaching Notes)

3. and, crucially, allow for sensible deviations from the written score that make the arrangement more accurately convey the original artists’ intentions.

Alternatively, exam boards should separate out their syllabuses into different genre strands, each with a genre-appropriate marking system.