Sight-singing is a significant skill in the curriculum for university music majors, with diverse approaches to instruction and assessment, often within a single institution. While sight-singing is mandated in accredited undergraduate music curricula (NASM, 2024), specific content, competencies, and assessment strategies are left to individual institutions to determine. Faculty assess sight-singing using a variety of approaches, including note-by-note, measure-by-measure, specified skills competencies, and a more holistic focus. Kleppinger (2017) outlined frustrations about various scoring methods. Research-based sight-singing assessments share little agreement on content, delivery, or scoring, which includes assessment by note (Author, 2001; Cooper, 1965; MakeMusic, 2011), measure or segment (Bowles, 1971; Otterstein & Mosher, 1932; Scott, 1996; College Board, 2025), interval (Nelson, 1970; Scofield, 1980; Thostenson, 1969), skill (Author, 2001), or a holistic approach (Carey, 1959; Hillbrand, 1924; Thostenson, 1969).The purpose of this study was to explore the types of approaches to assessing sight-singing employed by collegiate theory faculty. Research questions include:1. What approaches do collegiate theory faculty use to assess sight-singing?2. What led collegiate theory faculty to their system of choice, and are they satisfied with their approach?3. What types of information are collected when scoring sight-singing?4. What are advantages and disadvantages of various scoring approaches?Members of a theory faculty in a large music school in the southwest United States (N=10) were interviewed concerning their sight-singing assessment practices. Interview questions included educational background, courses taught involving sight-singing, departmental sight-singing scoring requirements, personal scoring procedures (if different from the program), previous sight-singing scoring experiences, perceived value and drawbacks of currently used system, and preferred sight-singing assessment system. In addition, each faculty member scored three pre-recorded sight-singing melodies, each performed with intentionally embedded errors to represent a variety of commonly-occurring sight-singing mistakes. For each recording, faculty were given the notated melody and allowed to mark the page as they listened to each performance. They were then asked to provide a score for each melody and an explanation of how they arrived at their score.Results include a reporting of background information, an account of reported program and personal sight-singing assessment practices, and an analysis of the scores given by each faculty member. Discussion includes an accounting of variations between the employed scoring systems and the possible benefits and deficiencies of the scoring systems. Implications for future research, as well as recommended practices for instruction and assessment, are shared.