Chapter Graphic
 : Wannabes
Loading Images
Approach: Group Level: 4 & 8 
Focus:   Discussing performances 
Resources: Cue card, photo card, 3 video recordings on laptop computer
446kb
Questions/instructions:
This activity uses the computer.
Click the Wannabes button.
[Still shots taken from each video shown on task card]
In the TV programme “Wannabes”, judges decide the best young pop singers in New Zealand from those who take part in the competition.
In this activity your team will be the judges of three “Wannabes” singers.
After listening to each singer, you’ll talk about their singing and judge their performance.
You will need to try to have good reasons for your decisions.
Here are the things you will talk about.
Show cue card and read to students.
Wannabes
1. How would you judge their singing?
Very good, good or not good enough?
2. What are the good things about the person’s singing.
3. What things could be improved?

% responses
y4
y8
Here is the first singer.
Click the 1 button. The video should start.
Click Next when it’s finished.
Now have a judges’ meeting to talk about the things on the card and make your decisions.
Allow time.
1. How did you judge their singing? Very good, good or not good enough?
2. What are the good things about the person’s singing?
3. What things could be improved?
First singer:
mentioned vocal quality issues
(strength, tone, range, etc.)
86
97
mentioned musicality issues
(rhythm, intonation, shaping of vocal line)
55
56
mentioned visual issues
(movement, body language, appearance)
61
73
mentioned appropriateness of choice of music
a) for singer
19
25
b) for this group of students
7
4
Overall strength of justification:
strong
11
22
moderate
57
55
weak
32
23
Here is the second singer.
Click the 2 button. Click Next when it’s finished.
Now have a judges’ meeting to talk about the things on the card and make your decisions.
Allow time.
4. How did you judge their singing? Very good, good or not good enough?
5. What are the good things about the person’s singing?
6. What things could be improved? 
Second singer:
mentioned vocal quality issues
(strength, tone, range, etc.)
88 96
mentioned musicality issues
(rhythm, intonation, shaping of vocal line)
55 67
mentioned visual issues
(movement, body language, appearance)
65 60
mentioned appropriateness of choice of music
    
a) for singer
16 26
b) for this group of students
3 4
Overall strength of justification:
strong
21 26
moderate
47 56
weak
32 18
Here is the third singer.
Click the 3 button.
Click Next when it’s finished.
Now have a judges’ meeting to talk about the things on the card and make your decisions.
Allow time.
7. How did you judge their singing?
    Very good, good or not good enough?
8. What are the good things about the person’s singing?
9. What things could be improved? 		    
Third singer:
mentioned vocal quality issues
(strength, tone, range, etc.)
84 84
mentioned musicality issues
(rhythm, intonation, shaping of vocal line)
71 80
mentioned visual issues
(movement, body language, appearance)
54 44
mentioned appropriateness of choice of music
    
a) for singer
13 14
b) for this group of students
8 5
Overall strength of justification:
strong
22 22
moderate
54 62
weak
24 16
Now have a judges’ meeting to decide which singer is the best overall.
You will need to give good reasons for choosing that singer as the best one.
Allow time.
10. Which singer did you choose as the best overall?
      The first, second or third performer?		    
Preferred singer:
singer 1
24 30
singer 2
23 16
singer 3
44 51
no clear preference
9 3
11. Why did you choose that singer as the best one?    
Strength of justification:
strong
26 31
moderate
56 53
weak
18 16
Overall apparent ability to discuss musical perfomance:
high
6 14
quite high
40 37
moderate
37 43
low
17 6
Total score: 5–6
12 24
4
19 12
3
26 32
2
12 15
0 – 1
31 17
Commentary:
The relative importance given to the different criteria varied with the three singers, with musicality issues mentioned comparatively little for the first singer, but much more for the third singer, and the reverse for appearance issues. There was only a modest advance in performance from year 4 to year 8.
 
Loading Images