In the conversation so far the references to Martin Carthy et al seem to describe them as representative of 'an English tradition'. I've got no quibble with such a representation but it seems to me to be beside the point as far as exams in traditional/folk music are concerned. Captain Birdseye's listing of the Comhaltas test contents struck me as very similar to the Grade 1 Theory exam run by the Australian Music Examinations Board (AMEB) which all the music teachers around here put students (including my daughters) through. I think it was Scotus who listed a similar set of initials above and I suspect many countries have similar arrangements. There are also practical exams along the same lines. But they're almost always done 'out of school' and as extras to the government school system.

This means there are two quite different types of learning going on. The school music teachers try to teach in an educational context while the extracurricular music teachers try to teach in a more 'training' context and usually have particular specialisations. The content of the AMEB courses strikes me as concentrating on understanding and technique and, given that the repertoire is mostly 'classical' (or 'high', 'art', or any of the usual euphemisms) there is a concentration, not on any performers but on composers. In the town I live in (population ~25k but, importantly, with a university) the extracurricular music teachers encourage students to participate in Eisteddfods, which are basically competitions. Here the categories of music are much wider and include 20th century, pop, jazz etc so that the classical 'lump' is somewhat leavened. But again, while the emphasis is on the student's performance there is still a need to provide the adjudicator with a written score against which the performance is measured. Most of these are by known composers but there is one local who listened to my playing of the Abbotts Bromley Horn Dance and went and arranged it for a recorder consort so some trad stuff gets in.

The reason for the length of this rave is that almost all of the people named above as terrific exemplar,s and thus who ought to be more widely known in a populace regarded as 'educated' in (specifically) English folk music, are "performers" rather than "composers". Now I know the more experienced among you will be able to quote items that each of the above has composed but I hope I've made the point.

And to use Martin Carthy as a particular example of a related point, a friend of mine had a tape of Martin singing "January Man" in Coventry Cathedral that he'd bootlegged at the performance. It was very clear that Martin started singing the piece in his consummately polished style but, two lines into the song, recognised the acoustic qualities of the sound space as offering potential for something spectacularly different and then delivered spectacularly.

An adjudicator measuring against a score would have marked the performance down. An examination wouldn't have even recognised it. A Certificate IV in audio and video production (a Vocational & Educational Trainiing Board industry qualification) might prepare a performer to be aware of acoustic potentials and a BA (Trad & Now) might write an excellent review of the event. And some others who heard it and who have better credentials than I may vehemently disgree with my perception of the event.

Exams may be helpful to some but as Russ pointed out, they're deceptively subjective and, as he also pointed out, have an amazing ability to fossilise outlooks.

Cheers, Rowan