Sounding out songwriting

An investigation into the teaching and assessment of songwriting in higher education

Martin Isherwood January 2014

Contents1

Section Page

Background 1

Introduction 2

Key findings and analysis 3

Conclusions 9

Appendix 1: List of institutions responding to the online questionnaire (22 total): 10

Appendix 2: Questionnaire 11

About the author

Martin Isherwood is Head of Music at LIPA. He has over 30 years’ experience working in
the music industry as a songwriter, producer, performer, sound-engineer, manager,
promoter and DJ. As a songwriter and producer he won the BBC Song for Europe 2003
and gained a UK number 15 chart hit. He is currently completing a PhD by Professional
Practice at the University of Bolton centred around his music industry practice.

Cover photo courtesy of Alex Richler/Fun Sized Media

Background

This project was commissioned by the Higher Education Academy (HEA) following a call
for short, discipline-specific research projects to inform and enhance learning and
teaching. The project aims to map teaching, learning and assessment practice in
Songwriting modules in higher education.

The research was conducted by means of an online questionnaire, which was circulated
to members of the National Association for Music in Higher Education (NAMHE),
members of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music (IAPSM UK)
and to HEA email contacts from earlier HEA popular music research projects.
There were some notable HEIs with long-established popular music programmes that did
not respond to the survey and also some new specialist private HE music providers with
dedicated songwriting degrees from which no response was received.

There were 28 completed responses to the survey from individuals teaching songwriting
on over 40 different music programmes across 22 institutions. For comparison, Taking
Notes - mapping and teaching popular music in HE, commissioned by the HEA in 2012,
received 35 responses from 25 institutions. In this light, the survey can be seen to be a
representative cross section of HEIs and programmes.

The questionnaire was designed as a scoping exercise, to get a sense of the landscape in
relation to the teaching of songwriting in higher education. It was focused on individual
understanding and perceptions of the sector and the data provided should be regarded as
indicative rather than definitive. As songwriting is sometimes taught as part of a number
of different music programmes within the same institution, responses were received
from two individuals teaching on different modules and programmes at six institutions.
In those questions where this would impact significantly on the data, the data has been
adjusted. The total number of responses received and number of responding
institutions for each question is included in Appendix 2.

A lightly edited (to preserve anonymity) but full set of the survey questions and
responses has been included in Appendix 2 as many colleagues will find the data and
particularly the ‘open text’ responses, of interest and value.

1
Introduction

Songs are the heart, soul and backbone of the music industry and therefore are at the
heart of popular music education. Seemingly, anyone including young children and the
musically untrained adult can create songs with good results, often spontaneously and in
moments. It should, therefore, be a relatively straightforward matter to teach and to
assess songwriting.

Higher education courses however, often struggle with the concept of songwriting as
distinct from composition. There is little consensus as to what a song is, for example a
musical product in a commercial marketplace, a track with or without words in a popular
style, or a specific emotional communication combining words and music. Separating out
songwriting from composition, from production and arranging, dealing with the specifics
of lyric writing and also with the complexities of co-writing on assessed programmes are
all major challenges when designing and delivering songwriting modules

Assessing songwriting is also highly controversial due to the high degree of subjectivity
involved, the lack of any particular technical ability required to write songs, and the
relationship of songs to an ephemeral market. For example, would the three chord and
16 word (mostly monosyllabic) ‘Love me do’ be acceptable on any level of a degree
programme? Successful songwriting can be relatively simple, but it is rarely easy, and even
with the simplest songs, while there may be little to teach, there is much to learn.

The research collates information on the aims, objectives, learning outcomes, schemes of
delivery, assessment, resources and feedback methods in songwriting modules at various
levels on key HE music programmes. This report maps what, and how, songwriting is
taught and assessed on selected and key HE music programmes. It provides a reference
point and a benchmark for the design and delivery of songwriting modules in H.E.

Where a finding relates to a particular question, the related survey question number(s)
will be indicated after/findings points in brackets (e.g. (Q1). Programme levels refer to
NQF levels e.g. Level 4, as the first year of a degree programme.

The survey questions, results and responses can be found in Appendix 2.

2
Key findings and analysis

Respondent and Programme Information

 Songwriting is taught at a wide range of institutions that deliver HE including FE colleges,
post-92 universities, traditional universities, conservatoires and private HE providers,
however, post-92 HEIs dominate. (Q1 & Q2)

 54% of music programmes that offered songwriting had been introduced in the last ten
years with 23% having taught songwriting for over 15 years. (Q3)

 Songwriting is taught as part of a range of music and popular music programmes, with
most common titles being BA (Hons) Music (34%) and BA (Hons) Popular Music (31%).
One respondent listed a BA (Hons) Songwriting and two MA programmes featured
Songwriting in the programme title. (Q4)

 A straightforward average of responses for annual student intake numbers on

programmes that include songwriting produced a figure of 106 students per annual intake
per programme. However, two very large responses in excess of 500 students came
from one specialist institution. Removing that particular response gave a more
representative average of 61students per programme. In total there were 5 institutions
with 100+ students; 6 institutions with between 50-99 students; and 12 institutions with
less than 50 students. (Q5)

Programme philosophy

 A majority (57%) indicated that the principal approach adopted in their programme
delivery was for songs to be considered as creative art. The second highest (21.5%) was
an approach to songwriting as commercial product. (Q6)

 81% of respondents indicated that songwriting success is defined by the listener’s

reaction, 58% indicated that songwriting success is defined by the writer’s satisfaction,
and 20% that success is defined by sales. (Q7)

 There appeared to be no direct correlation between stated commercial programme aims

and graduate commercial success. (Q6, Q7 & Q23)

3
Programme and module Structure

 85% of respondents agreed with the statement that songwriting can be taught with the
remainder neutral. 93% agreed that songwriting can be learned, again with the remainder
neutral. (Q7)

 At Level 4, Songwriting was offered by respondents as a core element for 42% as an

option by 15% and not offered by 42%. At Level 5, Songwriting was offered as core by
38%, as an option by 54%. At Level 6 Songwriting was core for 15% as an option for 62%
and not offered by 23%. (Q8)

 For the majority of programmes, Songwriting teaching took place within composition,
project or music practice modules. Few programmes ran stand-alone Songwriting
modules with only 12% at Level 4, 31% at Level 5 and 23% at Level 6. (Q9)

 No clear pattern emerged from the survey as to the percentage of students opting to
take Songwriting modules where offered, or as to what percentage of the programme
Songwriting options made up, with evenly distributed responses for both areas. (Q10 &
Q11)

Teaching songwriting

 50% of respondents stated that individual Songwriting tuition was offered at Level 6 but
with no clear pattern as to the amount of tuition offered. 17% offered 12 hours individual
tuition or more a year; 17% between 6 and 11 hours individual tuition and 20% between
one and five hours individual tuition. (Q12)

 Only two institutions (8%) stated that they offered individual tuition at Level 4. Five
institutions (21%) offered tuition at Level 5. The number of hours of individual tuition
offered at the lower levels were significantly lower and mostly between one and five
hours a year. (Q12 & Q13)

 Respondents indicated that a total 78% of both staff and students found individual tuition
very effective or effective. For staff the responses were split evenly between very
effective (39%) and effective (39%). Among students, a higher proportion of respondents
(50%) indicated that students perceived individual tuition as very effective. 39 % of

4
 respondents were unable to estimate the institutional management perspective, and 28%
estimated that management perceived individual tuition as ineffective in relation to cost.
(Q14)

 A wide range of teaching methods were used by most programmes: 87.5% used small
seminars, 83% used medium-sized workshops, 79% used large lecture groups and 71%
employing masterclasses. Large workshop groups were used by 67%. (Q15)

 All (100%) respondents stated that creativity and idea generation was taught. In terms of
what is taught, the art/commerce divide between programmes was more clearly defined
with 35% stating they did not cover marketing of songs and 42% stating they did not
cover responding to industry briefs or co-writing. One respondent stated co-writing
should be taught but that there were difficulties in assessment. (Q16)

 Respondents reported a range of common resources used to teach songwriting with no

recurrences other than Jimmy Webb’s Tunesmith which was cited by individuals at two
institutions. (Q17)

Assessing Songwriting

 There was a large degree of commonality across programme in terms of what is and is
not assessed. 100% of respondents stated that they assessed creativity. Interestingly, of
the 15 institutions (68%) that stated they assessed musical simplicity, and the 15
institutions (68%) that stated they assessed musical complexity, 14 institutions were
common to both these groups. (Q18)

 Just under half (45%) of programmes employed self-assessment and 36% used peer
assessment. One programme stated that vocal performance of the song demo was
important in terms of the assessment. (Q18)

 The most common methods of presentation of songs for assessment were CD (75%) and
public performance (76%). Seventy per cent of programmes indicated that they use lead
sheets in the assessment of songs. (Q19)

 Online assessment of songs was used by (43%) in 8 institutions. Of these, only two had
also responded that the programme delivery approach was songs as commercial product

5
 (Q6), suggesting that having a commercial programme focus does not necessarily equate
to the adoption of current industry practice on the programme. (Q19)

 At Level 6 the average duration of song portfolio required per 10 credits was 13 minutes.
(Q20)

Teaching staff

 On average programmes employed 2 full-time staff in the delivery of songwriting and a

further 3.5 hourly-paid staff. (Q21)

 With regard to staff qualifications, 42% of respondents reported that some or all of their
songwriting staff had PhDs and MAs in composition. 64% reported that some or all staff
had a BA (Hons) in Music/Popular music. 91% per cent of respondents indicated that
some or all staff had teaching qualifications, 96% of respondents that some or all staff on
their programmes were professional songwriters, and 100% of respondents stated that
some or all of songwriting programme staff were professional musicians. (Q22)

Graduate Songwriting Success

 Respondents were asked to estimate graduate success in songwriting by indicating how

often graduates achieved certain marks of success: for example, UK Top 40 chart placing.
While inherently imprecise in terms of the options provided: very often, frequently,
sometimes, etc. and also in that most HEIs only collect such data anecdotally rather than
systematically, it nonetheless provided a useful illustration of programme perceptions of
their graduates’ industrial success. Seventy per cent of respondents indicated that their
graduates had never had UK Top 40 success and 58% that their graduates had never had
International Top 40 success.

 Conversely, 75% of respondents indicated that their graduates featured in regional open
mic performances frequently or very often.

 One respondent (5%) indicated very common in all but two success categories, which
were reported as frequently achieved. However, this response was from an institution
for which there were two returns across a number of programmes, with the other
survey from that institution reporting that for the majority of categories, success was

6
 achieved only sometimes, and with just four categories in the frequently bracket. It would
appear therefore, looking at the table in Q23 in Appendix 2, that if these contradictory
results were discounted, other than the regional open mic category discussed above, only
the UK Tour and Battle of the Band winners would have one respondent each in the very
common category.

 Eight programmes at six institutions reported International Top 40 success sometimes or

frequently. Six programmes at five institutions reported UK Top 40 success sometimes or
frequently all 5 of which were included in the International success list of 6 institutions
above. However, of these 5 / 6 institutions only three are included in the four that
answered that Songwriting success is measured by sales in Q7.

 It is also worth noting that of those that indicated Songs as Commercial Product as the
programme focus in Q6, only two of these institutions were among the five reporting UK
Top 40 success. (Q23)

 Six respondents (27%) indicated they entered students on Level 6 of their programme to
the National Musician’s Benevolent Student Songwriting competition. The competition
has run nine times since 2003 and offers winners funding of £5,000 towards their
songwriting careers or projects. No information was requested as to knowledge of the
competition among programmes or whether programmes chose not to enter their final-
year students. (Q25)

Improving Songwriting in higher education (Q26)

 A number of respondents proposed closer co-operation and collaboration between

songwriting H.E. providers with more pedagogic research, conferences, networks and
shared resources.

 The full comments and responses are available in Appendix 2, but some of the
comments are reproduced below to provide a broad overview.

Pedagogic Research
A sense of community across the HE sector, ideally via a Pedagogic Research
conference… more scholarship and research papers…

I don’t know how other places do it…

7
I don’t really know what songwriting teaching is like at Higher Education apart
from what I teach.

Further research into teaching and assessing creative arts objectively

Some more textbooks and a wider conversation… giving it some more researched
cultural depth

A thorough, detailed, academic textbook.

Songwriting Programme Content

We retain the notion that music theory is an integral part of a music degree, I
don’t think all places do this.

More preparation in music theory and arranging.

Much more emphasis on musical analysis and appreciation of the canon.

Ensuring that the ‘professional’ songwriting faculty have some theoretical

understanding

Creating a broader philosophy that considers timeless aesthetic debates, rather

than simply measuring songwriting success in terms of efficiency and commercial
viability

Songwriting Graduate Success

A student specific platform for aspiring student songwriters to showcase their
material

More links with industry so students are better prepared… once they graduate

Success models among graduates

8
Conclusions

The delivery of songwriting in higher education is very diverse in terms of programme

aims, what is taught, what is assessed, assessment methods used, programme structure,
module size, etc.

It would appear that despite the centrality of songwriting to popular music Higher
Education, songwriting has established itself in an isolated, unplanned, uncoordinated and
organic manner in a range of institutions and programmes.

This survey did not look at songwriting learning outcomes or level outcomes and more
detailed research that compared and contrasted this information would be useful.

It is therefore difficult to assess what levels of attainment students achieve at different

institutions, how this compares across institutions and programmes and how and if ,this
songwriting academic success translates from higher education to the wider world.

Given the diversity of responses and the breadth of module scope, design and delivery, a
close reading of the survey results highlights the issue of the scale of the subject and
raises the question as to whether songwriting is actually just one activity that can be
taught as one module rather than as separate subjects: theory, harmony, composition,
lyric writing, production, arranging, collaboration, etc. that would possibly deserve more
attention and specific stand-alone modules.

It would appear that despite the diversity, there are significant common practices and
features but the delivery of songwriting in Higher Education would benefit enormously
from greater sharing of practice, experiences and further pedagogic research.

Martin Isherwood
January 2014

9
Appendix 1: List of institutions responding to the online

questionnaire (22 total):

Anglia Ruskin University

Bath Spa University (2)
Edinburgh Napier University
Falmouth University
Gateshead College (Northumbria University validation)
Kingston University
Leeds College of Music
Liverpool Community College
Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts
Newcastle College
Newcastle University (2)
Oxford Brookes University (2)
Central School of Speech & Drama
Southampton Solent University (2)
The Institute of Contemporary Music Performance (ICMP) (2)
University of Chester - Warrington Campus
University of East London
University of Hull
University of South Wales
University of Southampton (2)
University of St Mark and St John, Plymouth
University of the West of Scotland

10
Appendix 2: Questionnaire

Researcher: Martin Isherwood, LIPA

Important note:

1. This survey was designed as a scoping consultation exercise, to get a general sense
of the landscape in relation to the teaching of songwriting in higher education. The
data provided must be regarded as indicative rather than definitive.

2. There were, in total, 28 individual responses from 22 institutions. Six institutions

each provided responses from two individuals, teaching on different programmes.
In the institutionally-focused questions where a ‘double’ response would have
significantly skewed the data, only one response has been counted.

11
Q1 Personal details/contact. (N/A to this publication)

Q2
Is songwriting taught on any music degree programme at your institution?

Based on 28 responses / 22 institutions

YES 100%
NO 0%

Q3
For how many years has songwriting been taught on music programmes
at your institution

Based on 22 respondents / 22 institutions

20+ years 18%

15 -19 years 5%
10 -14 years 23%
5 - 9 years 27%
1- 4 years 27%

Q4
Name of music degree programme(s) on which songwriting is taught (Tick
all that apply)

Based on 28 respondents / 22 institutions

Name %
BA (Hons) Music 34%

BA (Hons) Popular Music 31%

BA (Hons) Commercial Music 10%

BA (Hons) Music Technology 7%

BA (Hons) Music Business 0%

Other 48.%

Other (please specify):

1. MMus Production of Popular Music
2. Foundation Degree Popular Music
3. MA Songwriting & Performance
4. also MMus Songwriting
5. BA (Hons) Popular Music Production, BA (Hons) Popular Music Performance,
BA (Hons); Urban and Electronic; Music, BA (Hons) Popular Music Journalism
and BA (Hons) Music Promotion
6. BA (Combined Honours) Music
7. BA (Hons) Songwriting
8. Live Music
9. FdA Popular music (FdA in Songwriting due 2013)

12
 10. BMus; BA Jazz and Popular Music; BA joint honours programmes
11. Degree in Folk and Traditional Music BA (Hons)
12. BMus (Popular Music Performance) & BA (Hons) (Creative Musicianship)
13. MA
14. BA (Hons) Commercial Music Production
15. Foundation Degree in Popular Music
16. BA Hons Music Production and Cultures
17. MA Songwriting; MMus (Songwriting)
18. BMus in Folk and Traditional
19. Foundation Degree Music Production

Q5
OPTIONAL QUESTION Please state the current annual total intake of
students to programmes that include a songwriting element:

Based on 24 respondents /19 institutions

Annual Programme Intake (in descending order)

Institution 1a 700
Institution 1b 500
Institution 2a 180
Institution 2b 150
Institution 3 150
Institution 4 90
Institution 5a 85
Institution 6 70
Institution 7 60
Institution 8a 60
Institution 9 60
Institution 10 60
Institution 11 50
Institution 8b 44
Institution 5b 40
Institution 12 40
Institution 13 30
Institution 14 30
Institution 15 30
Institution 16 28
Institution 13 25
Institution 17 24
Institution 18 22
Institution 19 15

13
Q6
Please indicate which one of the following approaches most closely reflects
the delivery of songwriting on your programme (Tick one only)

Based on 28 individual responses. Respondents from the same institution teach on different
programmes.

Songs as creative art 57%

Songs as communication 3.5%

Songs as commercial product 21.5%

Other (please specify) 18%

Other
1 both the business of songwriting and as a creative art
2 Songs as the expression of a unique voice
3 Combination of creative art and commercial product
4 Songwriting as a skill that can be applied in various vocational contexts
5 Songs as expression of collective culture

Q7
OPTIONAL QUESTION Please indicate the level to which the following
statements accord with the approaches adopted in the delivery of
songwriting on your programme.

Based on 28 individual responses. Respondents from the same institution teach on different
programmes.

Agree Neutral Disagree

Songwriting success is measured by the
58% 35% 7%
writer's satisfaction
Songwriting success is measured by a
81% 15% 4%
listener's reaction
Songwriting success is measured by sales 20% 40% 40%

Songwriting can be taught 85% 15% 0%

Songwriting can be learned 93% 7% 0%

Songwriting is simple 8% 32% 60%

Songwriting is easy 0% 36% 64%

14
Q8
Please indicate if songwriting is delivered at the following FHEQ Levels on
your programmes and whether as core or as an option?

Based on 24 respondents / 20 institutions

Core Option N/Al

Level 4 42% 16% 42%
Level 5 38% 54% 8%
Level 6 15% 62% 23%

Q9
Please indicate how songwriting modules are structured at the following
levels. (Tick one only per row) Songwriting is taught as part of:

Based on 24 respondents / 20 institutions

Composition /
Stand alone Other type of
music Practice based /
songwriting music module N/A
creation project modules
modules (please specify)
modules

Level 4 12% 42% 0% 4% 42%

Level 5 31% 27% 19% 11.5% 11.5%

Level 6 23% 23% 15% 15% 23%

Other (please specify here bullet points please)

1 Most students choose to write original pieces for an album and record, market it
etc. but not all.
2 At level 5 and level 6, Songwriting is an option either as an 'Independent Study' or
as part of the 'Professional Practice' module (in the latter guise, it counts as a
'placement' activity).
3 Portfolio containing original song productions and performances
4 These tick boxes don't mean anything to me. They are core on some courses and
elective on others.
5 Taught as part of Music Skills module
6 Songwriting as such is only very much on the fringes of our course. Music harmony,
tonality etc. is taught to a basic level and lyric writing, melody construction etc. is
covered, but only in relatively few lessons on each module which is mainly focussed
on production in most cases.
7 Level 7 - songwriting-specific curriculum, with practice-based songwriting-specific
modules. PhD – songwriting related research projects

15
Q10
Where songwriting is an option, please estimate roughly what percentage of students on
your programme opt to take songwriting modules or elements?

Based on 24 respondents / 19 institutions

Don’t
Percentage 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
know
students

Respondents 19% 12% 12% 12% 8% 12% 8% 0% 0% 4% 15%

Q11
OPTIONAL QUESTION Assuming that a student takes all songwriting
options offered: what percentage of total credits at each level, are these
songwriting modules / elements worth? (per student)

Based on 23 respondents / 20 institutions

Don't know 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90 % 100%

(% credits)

Level 4 33% 7% 20% 40% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Level 5 11% 21% 37% 21% 5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Level 6 11% 16% 21% 26% 16% 0% 5% 0% 5% 0% 0%

Q12
Is one to one tuition offered for songwriting? (please tick all that apply)

Based on 24respondents / 19 institutions

Level 4 8%
Level 5 21%
Level 6 50%
Not offered 50%

Q13
If yes, how many hours one to one tuition do students receive each year?

Based on 24 respondents / 18 institutions

12 + hrs 6 – 11 hrs 1 – 5 hrs 0 hrs

Level 4 – hrs per year 0% 0% 15% 85%
Level 5 – hrs per year 0% 14% 19% 66%
Level 6 – hrs per year 17% 17% 20% 46%

16
 Q14
OPTIONAL QUESTION Relative to cost, please estimate the
effectiveness of one to one tuition in teaching songwriting as perceived by

Based on 18 respondents / 15 institutions

Very effective Effective Ineffective Not known / N/A

Students 50% 28% 6% 17%

Tutors 39% 39% 6% 17%

Management 6% 28% 28% 39%

Please feel free to offer any additional explanation or comment here:

1 Students can bring their work to individual tutorials if desired. Tutors give individual attention
within group classes
2 No specific one-to-one tuition offered but individual tutorials are held at intervals throughout
the module.
3 One to one tutorials are an optional part for certain assignments in the Songwriting module.
4 When I say it is offered, I mean that if a student wanted to spend time with me dealing with
songwriting matters, I would spend time with them doing it. It doesn't happen very often, but it
has happened. There isn't any scheduled time given over to this, but students would be free to
consult me on it and I would help them.
5 I run a student songwriting club (Songlab) with a colleague that offers one to one and
workshop-style contact, outside the course and unpaid.
6 Songwriting is undertaken by every Commercial Music undergraduate and individual or group
songs are assessed. Most of our one-to-one (tutorial-model) songwriting teaching is undertaken
at Masters level.

Q15
Other than one to one tuition, please indicate if the following methods are
used to teach songwriting on your programme(s).

Based on 24 respondents / 18 institutions

Used Not used

Visiting / Professional masterclasses 71% 29%

Large lecture groups (tutor led) 79% 21%

Large songwriting workshop (song critique / feedback) 67% 33%

Small / medium workshops (creating / writing songs) 83% 17%

Small seminar (student song presentations with feedback) 87.5% 12.5%

Other (please specify here - bullets please)

1 Small lecture/seminar groups followed by practical sessions
2 If students require it they may have a 1-2-1 tutorial
3 Depends what you define as a small/large group. I teach 2 full classes of 14(avg) which I don't
feel needs breaking down any further
4 Online crit and discussion board Upload for tutor crit Live video chat crit for Distance Learning
YouTube one-way video feedback - audio, lyrics and tutor voiceover.

17
Q16
Please indicate if the following subject areas are taught in the songwriting
modules on your programme.

Based on 24 respondents / 18 institutions

Taught Not Taught

Creativity / idea generation 100% 0%
Responding to industry briefs (songlink etc.) 58% 42%
Co-writing 58% 42%
Song forms / structure 100% 0%
Title placement / Chorus writing& development 87.5% 12.5%
Lyric writing 96% 4%
Communicating specific emotions
83% 17%
(e.g. love songs, break up songs etc.)
Melody writing / Prosody 92% 8%
Harmony 83% 17%
Analysis / pastiche 83% 17%
Referencing influences from the song canon
62.5% 37.5%
in own work
Re-writing 67% 33%
Producing lead sheets 67% 33%
DIY marketing & sales of songs 65% 35%

Please list any other subject areas covered (bullet points please)
1 Hooks. riffs. what makes a song bad. technology& production tips. remix. cliché
titles. genres.
2 Whilst not yet including industry briefs within the composition module these
aspects along with marketing are covered on other modules and extracurricular
talks
3 Music semiotics are also covered on a separate module but obviously enter into
the songwriting process and are discussed during workshops
4 Form, scansion, music industry
5 Important to note that categories like melody and harmony, analytical method,
history, are covered in other modules.
6 Live presentation Recorded presentation The Writer-Producer
7 Because this is part of the Folk degree, we look at the techniques used by Ewan
MacColl, Peggy Seeger in the award -winning 'Radio Ballads', and use 'actuality'
recordings from which students construct their songs.
8 There's a lot more to lyric writing than implied such as various rhyme type and
schema, plot development, metaphor/metonym/synecdoche/irony, framing devices
and sense bound writing. Co-writing should be taught but the current curriculum
doesn't feel it can be assessed. This is being debated.
9 Word setting
10 Collaborative groups psychology (Masters programme) Project based (pop video
to market product) Semiotics of song (leading to band branding etc.) Song as part
of tour promo package (project-based)

18
Q17
OPTIONAL QUESTION Please list the most common songwriting resource(s) (books,
web, cds etc.) recommended / used on your programme (Author, Date, Title)

Based on 8 respondents / 7 institutions

# Resource 1
1 tutor devised materials
2 Berkeley Songwriting series
3 Self written lecture notes (400 pages)
4 Zollo, Songwriters on Songwriting
5 Peter Cox, 2008 'Set Into Song'
6 Shelia Davis, 1992, The songwriter’s
idea book
7 Jimmy Webb 'Tunesmith'
8 Zollo, Songwriters on Songwriting
#Resource 2
1software (ProTools, GarageBand, Sibelius)
2 A variety of arranging and music theory
books
3 Citron, Blume, Zollo
4 Jimmy Webb, Tunesmith
5 Ben Harker ,2009, 'A Class Act'
6 Rikky Rooksby, 2006, Songwriting; writing
better lyrics
7 Bruce Cole 'The Pop Composer's Handbook'
8 Repertoire/YouTube/Spotify for analysis of
canon

Q18
Please indicate which of the following criteria / factors are used in the assessment of songs.
Based on 22 respondents / 17 institutions

Assessed Not Assessed

Commercial viability 57% 43%
Professional presentation standards 95% 5%
Professional production standards 73% 27%
Communicating specific emotions 64% 36%
Creativity 100% 0%
Originality 86% 14%
Student defined & pre-agreed criteria /
learning contract 64% 36%
Relationship to genre / style 95% 5%
Musical complexity 68% 32%
Musical simplicity 68% 32%
Memorability 64% 36%
Logs / Blogs 55% 45%
Critical Evaluations 86% 14%
Peer assessment / feedback 36% 64%
Self-assessment 45% 55%
Other (please detail below) 50% 50%

Other
1. presentation e.g. video, marketing materials
2. Clarity (of form, genre etc.) Compositional technique (I give much more precise
criteria detail on melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, instrumental and lyrical invention
and construction than is listed here) Lyrical technique (as above - but issues of
scansion, imagery, clarity etc.
3. Again, I will say songwriting does not make up a large part of what we do.
4. Effectiveness of word setting
5. Quality of lead vocal is a basic production expectation, even in low-tech demos.
The catch-all criterion 'artistic quality' and 'Evidence of creative control of process'
(evidenced through product). After some years, we have now abandoned self-
evaluation of process as it was unhelpful to the assessment process.

19
Q19
OPTIONAL QUESTION Please indicate if the following are used for the presentation of
student songs for assessment?

Based on 21 respondents / 17 institutions

Used Not used

High quality recordings on-

43% 57%
line e.g. Soundcloud

High quality recording on CD 67% 33%

Basic demo quality recording

75% 25%
(piano / vox etc.) on CD
Basic demo quality recording
(piano / vox etc.) on-line 52% 48%
(student e-portfolio)

Public performance 76% 24%

Peer performance 66.67% 33.33%

Seminar / workshop
55% 45%
presentation

Lead sheet 70% 30%

Q20 Level 6 songwriting modules - submission requirements Irrespective of total duration of Level
6 songwriting portfolio submissions, please indicate to the nearest time value, the number of
minutes of music required per 10 credits.
Based on 13 respondents / 10 institutions

Minutes required per 10 credits at Level 6

Respondent No. of min.

1 15
2 8
3 5
4 20
5 20
6 0
7 15
8 7
9 10
10 25
11 15
12 15
13 3
Ave: c. 13min

13
Q21
OPTIONAL QUESTION Please indicate the numbers of staff (individuals)
who deliver any songwriting teaching on your programme

Full Time staff

1 8 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 3 2 1 4 1

Average: 2.1

Based on 20 respondents / 17 institutions

Hourly paid staff

4 8 12 4 1 1 4 2 1 4 2 2 0 1

Average: 3.5

Based on 14 respondents 10 institutions

Q22 Please indicate the background / levels of experience of the songwriting

teaching staff on your programme.
Based on 22 responses / 17 institutions

Background/Experience All Most Some None Don't know

PhD Composition 14% 14% 14% 55% 5%

PhD Popular 5% 9% 23% 59% 5%

Music MA Songwriting
9% 0% 32% 59% 0%
/ Composition
BA (Hons) Music /
27% 5% 32% 36% 0%
Popular Music
Professional Songwriter 23% 36% 36% 5% 0%

Professional Musician 59% 14% 27% 0% 0%

Teaching Qualification 41% 18% 32% 9% 0%

HEA Membership 23% 9% 27% 27% 14%

Other (please specify)

1 BA Combined Honours (Classical music with anthropology) & HND Light Music
2 Currently applying for HEA fellowship.
3 My PhD wasn't in popular music or composition!
4 Our teaching staff are selected for their industry experience and track record first, academic
background second.
5 PhD Musicology (some)
6 MA Music
7 All our songwriting teachers are PRS members with an extant body of work. Some have PhDs
in progress. We also use some pro songwriters for online assessment only (no teaching).

14
Q23
OPTIONAL QUESTION Please estimate the levels of commercial
songwriting success regularly attained by graduates from your programme
who specialised in songwriting

Based on 20 responses / 16 institutions

Very Frequent Sometimes Never

common
Publishing contract 5% 10% 75% 10%

Recording contract 5% 10% 80% 5%

UK Chart Top 40 0% 5% 25% 70%

International Chart Top 40 0% 11% 32% 58%

UK Tours 10% 5% 80% 5%

International tours 5% 10% 80% 5%

Major Festivals 5% 20% 65% 10%

National radio play 5% 5% 85% 5%

Song writing competition
finalists / winners
5% 10% 70% 15%
Battle of band finalists /
winners
10% 15% 60% 15%
Regional open mic night
performances
45% 30% 25% 0%

Other (please specify)

1 working as songwriting demo finishers
2 The course is relatively new converted to degree status very recently so it is early
days for the above questions
3 I'm not entirely sure!
4 This is only from my knowledge having been teaching over 18 months.
5 Again, I wouldn't say the number of people graduating from our course who go on
to specialise in songwriting is very high, although we have had some professional
songwriting success.
6 Some go on to further study (of songwriting) with us (MA and PhD)

Q24
Does your programme enter students into the Musicians Benevolent Fund
student songwriting contest?

Based on 22 responses / 17 institutions

Yes 27%
No 73%

15
Q25
If yes please indicate the number of times students on your programme have achieved the
following placings in the MBF competition

Based on 12 responses / 10 institutions

More than 4 times 2 - 3 times Once Never

Winner 8% 25% 0% 67%
Runner up 0% 25% 8% 67%
Finalist 8% 17% 8% 67%

Q26
OPTIONAL QUESTION What could be done to improve songwriting
teaching in Higher Education? (Bullet points please)

Based on 13 responses / 10 institutions

Responses
 I don't know how other places do it. We retain the notion that understanding music theory is an
integral part of a music degree, I don't think all places do this.

 More preparation in music theory and arranging. Many students are full of creative ideas but lack the tools of
the trade to hone their craft

 Enable songwriting to encompass a wider range of styles and methods – including production (not
just acoustic guitar, which seems to relate to a number of students) Embed more understanding of
creativity - definition/application etc.

 A thorough, detailed, academic textbook. A student specific performing platform for aspiring student
songwriters to showcase their material

 The culture of songwriting enjoys very little theoretical or academic discourse. This is almost in
inverse proportion to the social and economic impact of the craft. Some more textbooks and a wider
conversation about Songwriting (beyond the 'Writing Hit Songs' manuals) could improve songwriting
teaching by giving it some researched cultural depth.

 In a relatively traditional Music degree like ours, the key issue has usually been working out the relationship
between so-called song writing and so-called composition. It's a modernist/popular divide, supposed originality
as opposed to assumed imitation. I started this element of the course (apparently in 2002!) very much as an
art-form approach, but over the years cast it additionally in terms of employability. That's how I'd prefer to see
it, but the external agenda might dictate a stronger move towards the latter emphasis. I used to teach it
alone, by the way, till about 2009, but shifted my contract so that's it now delivered by external professional
practitioners - good thing, too. I have no real suggestions for improvement: when I left the module's delivery, I
thought it worked quite well, in a relatively modest way.

 Understand that the best approach is not to say "This is how you MUST write songs" but "This is
how some other writers write: now let's help you discover how YOU write in the light of this."

 Further research into teaching and assessing creative arts objectively. More links with industry so students are
better prepared to enter into the industry once they graduate.

16
 (Note: single response below)
 Creating a distinction between songwriting and singer-songwriting
 Ensuring that teaching is not simply informed by experience in the industry some 20+ years
ago
 Ensuring that the 'professional' songwriting faculty have some level of theoretical
understanding
 Raising the level of critical thinking skills in both faculty and staff
 Using more specific compositional language. At present, songwriting feedback tends to be
quite vague and woolly. Lack of rigour.
 Creating a broader philosophy that considers timeless aesthetic debates. Rather than
 simply measuring songwriting success in terms of efficiency and commercial viability
 Much more emphasis on musical analysis and appreciation of the canon. Student
understanding of the past is often shocking. Thus, the line between referencing influences
and pastiche are often blurred.
 Further contextualisation of songwriting within Music.

 I don't know - I don't really know what songwriting teaching is like at Higher Education apart from what I
teach and what I got taught at University in the 1990s. But I do think that one thing that is generally under-
rated is the importance of how and when to use inversions / "slash" chords.

 In my case, the ability (financially) to bring in a greater variety of experts to deliver workshops and
masterclasses.

 A sense of community across the HE sector, ideally via a Pedagogic Research conference of some sort. More
scholarship and research papers, particularly relating to the relationship of process and product, and perhaps
to Pedagogic Research of the subject... This survey is a welcome start.

 Success models among graduates. Wider use of soundcloud.

17
Contact us
The Higher Education Academy
Innovation Way
York Science Park
Heslington
York
YO10 5BR
+44 (0)1904 717500
enquiries@heacademy.ac.uk
© The Higher Education Academy, 2013
The Higher Education Academy (HEA) is a national body for learning
and teaching in higher education. We work with universities and
other higher education providers to bring about change in learning
and teaching. We do this to improve the experience that students
have while they are studying, and to support and develop those who
teach them. Our activities focus on rewarding and recognising
excellence in teaching, bringing together people and resources to
research and share best practice, and by helping to influence, shape
and implement policy - locally, nationally, and internationally.
The HEA supports staff in higher education throughout their
careers, from those who are new to teaching through to senior
management. We offer services at a generic learning and teaching
level as well as in 28 different disciplines. Through our partnership
managers we work directly with HE providers to understand
individual circumstances and priorities, and bring together resources
to meet them.
The HEA has knowledge, experience and expertise in higher
education. Our service and product range is broader
than any other competitor.
www.heacademy.ac.uk | www.twitter.com/heacademy
The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and
not necessarily those of the Higher Education Academy. No part of
this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or any storage and retrieval system without the written
permission of the Editor. Such permission will normally be granted
for educational purposes provided that due acknowledgement is
given.
To request copies of this report in large print or in a different
format, please contact the communications office at the Higher
Education Academy: 01904 717500 or pressoffice@heacademy.ac.uk
The Higher Education Academy is a company limited by guarantee
registered in England and Wales no. 04931031. Registered as a
charity in England and Wales no. 1101607. Registered as a charity in
Scotland no. SC043946.
The Higher Education Academy and its logo are registered
trademarks and should not be used without our permission.
18