Captain Birdseye,

"...its better than the competition system, which is more subjective"

I agree that the competitions system is subjective.
I assume that everybody who is involved in a competition system agrees.

However, for me that is one of its most significant advantages.
Not the subjectivity, but the universal knowledge of that subjectivity.

Perhaps newbie contestants might not know but it is something that is quickly learned.

So, here is my STRONG claim:
An examination system is JUST AS SUBJECTIVE.

You might think I am talking about the examiners, but I am not.

I am referring to the system itself.

A number of participants in this thread have made the same point. I am just going to be blunter.

The creation of a curriculum dealing with traditional music will be just as much an exercise in arbitrary subjectivity as the judging of a competition.

For me that is one of its most significant DISadvantages.
Not the subjectivity, but the fact that it is not as obvious as in the case of competitions.

Here's a thought experiment. I'll use a hypothetical example from my own musical background.

Suppose your examination system comes into being and I look over the curriculum.
I notice that J. P. Fraley (Eastern Kentucky) is on the list but Ernie Carpenter (Central WV) is not. I an intimately familiar with the music of both fiddlers. I know, from my own experience, that both are equally excellent fiddlers. However, they sound as different as two people can sound who are playing the same instrument. So, what conclusion do I draw from the curriculum? Simply that whoever created it prefers J. P.'s sound. That preference is just as arbitrary and subjective as any contest judge's. I don't have a problem with that preference per se, but I do have a problem when that person's (or committee's) personal preferences become a norm.

I am not suggesting that subjectivity can or should be eliminated, but we should always be up front about it.
At least, in a competitive system, nothing is hidden behind the curtain.