How to get the best out of a music competition
How to get the best out of a music competition
Many teachers worry that adjudication preparation is about polishing repertoire to perfection. In practice, the bigger issue is whether students understand what they are aiming for and how to respond to feedback under pressure.
I was reading an article in Limelight magazine recently about adjudication and written feedback, and it got me thinking. The focus wasn’t on repertoire choices or technical polish, but on how judges communicate with students and how those comments are received. It made me reflect on 3 things:
1. How often we underestimate the role of language in preparation - not just what students play, but whether they understand the musical priorities being assessed and know how to make sense of the feedback that they are given.
2. The purpose of entering students into competitions in the first place, and how deliberately preparing their mindset can help them make the most of the experience - especially the process and the feedback they receive.
3. How we can adjust the way that we give feedback to students to make it genuinely useful.
William Gillock’s approach to judging and preparing students offers a useful reminder: adjudication success is less about last-minute fixes and more about the vocabulary we give students long before they walk into the room.
Why adjudication language matters
Students often experience adjudication comments as either praise or criticism, with little sense of how to act on them. This is especially true for younger or intermediate players. When feedback feels vague or emotional, students either dismiss it or take it personally.
Gillock understood that adjudication should function as instruction, not evaluation alone. His written comments consistently linked sound, technique, and musical intention. The result was feedback that students could use.
That same principle applies in our teaching. If students regularly hear clear, consistent musical language in lessons, adjudication comments stop being mysterious. They become familiar territory.
What Gillock actually listened for
Gillock’s notes show remarkable consistency. He listened first for musical priorities, not surface accuracy. Rhythm, tone, phrasing, balance, and control appeared repeatedly in his comments, even when addressing technical issues.
Importantly, he avoided global judgments. Instead of “nice piece” or “needs work,” his comments pointed to specific elements: rhythmic stability, clarity of articulation, control of tempo changes, quality of tone, or shaping of phrases.
This matters because students improve fastest when they can connect a comment to a physical or musical action. “Control the tempo more carefully” suggests a different practice strategy than “play more confidently.”
Three practical ways to apply this in lessons
1. Teach a shared vocabulary early
Students should regularly hear the same musical terms used in consistent ways. Words like rhythmic stability, tone quality, phrasing, and control should not be reserved for advanced students.
When students already understand these concepts, adjudication comments stop sounding abstract. They recognise the language and know what to adjust.
This also helps parents interpret feedback more constructively.
2. Separate encouragement from instruction
Gillock was generous with praise, but his praise was specific. He acknowledged effort, preparation, and improvement without pretending that weaknesses weren’t present.
In lessons, this means avoiding praise that closes the conversation. “That was great” feels good but gives no direction. “Your rhythmic control was much stronger today” reinforces effort and highlights what mattered.
Students preparing for adjudication need both reassurance and clarity. Mixing the two carefully helps them stay motivated without losing focus.
3. Practise responding to feedback
One of the most useful things we can do is simulate the adjudication experience. Ask students to play once without interruption, then offer two or three concise comments—nothing more.
Have them explain back what they heard and what they would practise next. This develops reflection skills and reduces anxiety when similar comments come from a judge.
Over time, students learn that feedback is information, not a verdict.
A final reminder
Gillock believed that adjudication should elevate students, not intimidate them. His comments were direct but humane, and his expectations were high without being discouraging.
When students enter adjudication understanding the language of musical priorities, they are better prepared regardless of the score they receive. They listen more calmly, interpret feedback more accurately, and leave with a clearer sense of what to work on next.
That, ultimately, is the real value of adjudication—and it begins in the lesson, not the judging room.